The cricket thread

scrumhalf · July 2016

Well played Pakistan. A very tense last few hours.

Honourable mentions to Woakes and Bairstow for their batting. Moeen - what the hell were you thinking of?

In the absence of a decent spinner we are in trouble for India. I don't know what's the current state of Monty Panesar, but they have to keep an eye out. Moeen isn't a match-winning spinner, I don't know who else there is. Borthwick's now considered to be a batsman primarily. Tredwell - more of a defensive bowler.

Second test team? Stokes in for Finn or Ball. Maybe Rashid for Moeen.

Heartfeltdawn · July 2016

crunchman said:

Drop VInce or Ballance and play Bairstow as a batsman. Pick Foster or Foakes as the keeper. With Stokes back you have him at 6, Ali at 7, Woakes at 8, and the keeper at 9 and you still bat incredibly deep.

Bairstow is one of our best three batsmen and you won't get the best out of him as a batsman if he's keeping as well. Look at Alec Stewart. His average was 12 runs higher when he played as a batsmen than when he kept wicket. Sangakarra and De Villiers also have much better batting stats when they are not keeping. Unlike Stewart, Bairstow isn't even that good a keeper and the batting depth we have there is no excuse for playing him as the keeper. Unless he's improved immeasurably in the last few months Buttler's keeping is even worse than Bairstow's so he's not an option either.

It does look like we are back to the bad old days of being completely unable to play leg spin. I wonder if Borthwick might do better given that he bowls leg spin himself.

I've stated my opposition to both Bairstow and Buttler playing as wicktkeeper batsmen many times and nothing has changed. The catches YJB has put down have been dreadful, perhaps even worse than Prior early on with England.

Our middle order still has no real sense of organisation. The seam bowling situation is positive. Anderson will be back, Ball looks more than useful and deserved more than one wicket, Woakes has zipped on, Finn will hopefully come back, Wood is on the mend and has been bowling this week, and we still haven't tried Footitt out. Spin bowling is still very inconsistent. Moeen's bowling is going backwards and today's shot was inexplicable for someone rated as having a good control of the mental side of the game.

Old Trafford will offer something for the bowlers.

Cook
Hales
Ballance - he's shown some fight today. Deserves to keep on. Vince isn't ready. Put him at 3.
Root
Bairstow
Stokes
Wicketkeeper - Foakes gets the pundit tip but I'd prefer Foster for experience and Ben Cox for young potential. Good hands, that one.
Woakes
Rashid
Broad
Anderson - if fit. If not then Ball. He's bowling better than Finn right now.

crunchman · July 2016

I'd agree with you completely on the team. Foster would be my preference as well. I'm not sure about the batting order though. I'd leave Ballance lower than 3. He got found out there before. If you expose him to a newish ball I think you are asking for trouble. I'd probably stick with Root at 3 and Ballance at 4.

scrumhalf · July 2016

I wouldn't put Root at 3. He bats well at 4, and we must play him in his best position and work our way around him.

Heartfeltdawn · July 2016

crunchman said:

I'd agree with you completely on the team. Foster would be my preference as well. I'm not sure about the batting order though. I'd leave Ballance lower than 3. He got found out there before. If you expose him to a newish ball I think you are asking for trouble. I'd probably stick with Root at 3 and Ballance at 4.

Root batting from 4-6: 57 innings, 2953 runs at 60.26, and eight centuries.
Root batting from 1-3: 11 innings, 597 runs at 33, and one century.

If you have a diamond at 4, then you shouldn't use him to plug a gap at 3 because he might not succeed at 3 and then you've lost a great number 4.

Ballance isn't incapable against the new ball. His first Test ton saw him come in at 3 on 22-1 after 10 overs. Subsequent tons occurred after he came in at 55-1, 46-1, and 1-15 respectively. He wasn't the first to have a technical issue pointed out in the Test arena and many have come back from similar dilemmas (the one that will stay with me is Gooch in 1989 playing around his front pad). As it seems that Ian Bell's career is over and there's a number of potential candidates who would make a decent claim without that claim being hugely strong (Borthwick, Stoneman, James Hildreth, possibly even Nicks Gubbins and Browne), at some point the selectors have to decide whether to go for a candidate on sheer weight of runs alone or to pick someone whose overall record might not be stellar but they strike you as having the right aptitude for Test cricket (as Fletcher did when he selected Trescothick). If I were going to go leftfield, I'd throw my lot in with Gubbins.

@scrumhalf Panesar is nowhere near an England spot. He's played more Minor Counties cricket for Bedfordshire this season than he has for the full Northants team. If we do go with three spinners for the India trip, then I would go with Ali, Rashid, and Tredwell. The selectors know what they would be getting from all three.

crunchman · July 2016

@Heartfeltdawn - I think bowler's have worked out Ballance now. That average was compiled early on against some lesser fast bowling attacks. 10 of his first 11 tests were against SL, India and WI. Wahab and Amir, and the Australian and South African fast bowlers would have a field day against him if he's coming in at 3. I'm still not entirely convinced that bringing him back now was a great idea but if he is going to play he's got to be shielded from the new ball.

Also, Root's stats between one and three include when he first came into the team as an opener and struggled. He's a much better player than that now. From that point of view your comparison is a bit iffy. Even if he averages 50 at 3 instead of 60 he will make life so much easier for the middle order players that overall the team will be better off. I also don't think there is anyone else in the current team equipped to bat at 3.

The other option is to bring in Borthwick at 3 - it's where he bats for Durham on some quite spicy pitches. It would also give you another spin option of sorts. That would mean leaving out Ballance one test after bringing him back though which isn't a great way to treat him.

Thinking about it there is some merit to playing Ali with all the Pakistan left armers to create rough for him - although Root could chip in with some offspin if Rashid plays. That's one of the problems with Ali. He's not that much better as a bowler than Root.

Edit: just noticed that Borthwick top scored for Durham yesterday against a Lancs side containing Jimmy Anderson.

Heartfeltdawn · July 2016

Root didn't first come into the team as an opening batsman His debut against India was at 6 and he then played five Tests against NZ at 5. Undoubtedly he is a better player than when he entered the Test arena but I'd question the mental approach right now. Those two dismissals at Lords were not indicative of a bloke fully mentally out there. Moeen's hoick in the 2nd innings was lousy but Root's swipe across the line at Shah in the first innings was no better in my view. There is attacking and then there is giving away your wicket when you are in control.

It's pertinent to look at Australia and Steve Smith. After he scored a bucketload of runs at 4, he went up to 3 against WI and England and NZ in 2015 and scored even more. He then dropped down to 4 in order to strengthen it and to incorporate lesser experienced players like Burns and Khawaja above him. Both of those guys have scored good runs as has Voges at 5. The current Australian top 5 average 60 between them (Burns the lowest at 49.29, Voges the highest at 95). That decision to drop down to 4 was the right one for Australia and allows them to figure out what their best 6 and 7 combination is.

Compare that to England's dilemma. Hales starting up averages 30, Vince averages 18, Ballance is back in the fold after time away and questions on technique, Stokes isn't here but still only averages 33, Bairstow isn't quite over 40, and Moeen is under 30 again. From 4 to 7, England at Lords have a career average of 33.55. Much is made of our batting depth but this can't cover over a misfiring middle order. If you push Root up the order then it leaves that middle order looking weaker, and we saw at Lords.

Ballance did indeed score runs against some lesser lights but it's also right to say that he scored runs against Sri Lanka in a series we ultimately lost and runs in the West Indies when we drew 1-1. I don't count India as a lesser light. He scored heavily against them when they last came here and we're going off there in November. The weight of runs he scored against them in the past makes him a serious candidate for the winter tour. In the England side right now, only Cook and Root average more than Ballance (46.03 versus 46.87 and 52.20). Are we really that strong that we can ignore a bloke who has actually put runs on the board at international level? I don't think so.

A lot of the possible selections revolve around whether Stokes is fully fit. I wouldn't pick a non-bowling Stokes as a batsman alone. He is bowling in that Lancs-Durham game and it's likely the England bods will also be looking at Matt Parkinson's leg spin as well with an eye to sending him on some England training in the winter. If Stokes isn't ready then I'd happily sub Borthwick for him. The rough created by the left handers would help an off spinner but equally will help a leg spinner in the form of Rashid who bowls a lot of googlies (too many in my view but never mind...). So if Stokes isn't fully firing, then things could look like this.

Cook
Hales
Ballance
Root
Bairstow
Borthwick
Foster (wk)
Woakes
Rashid
Broad
Anderson

Potentially you could bat Borthwick at 3, Ballance at 5, Bairstow at 6.

'course, England won't do this. More chance of Chris bloody Cowdrey being recalled

scrumhalf · July 2016

I see Sam Northeast made 190 today, he's also made 189 and 191.

crunchman · July 2016

'course, England won't do this. More chance of Chris bloody Cowdrey being recalled

Talking of old timers Marcus Trescothick is still probably better than Hales or most of the other competitors to open alongside Cook.

He's just equalled Harold Gimblett's record for first class centuries for Somerset.

Heartfeltdawn · July 2016

crunchman said:
Talking of old timers Marcus Trescothick is still probably better than Hales or most of the other competitors to open alongside Cook.

He's just equalled Harold Gimblett's record for first class centuries for Somerset.

And he'll probably be better next year as well. Seen him a couple of times this year and he still looks better than most of the younger ones who have tried out for England this year. And now he's got a double ton

Interesting how some of the older players who focus on one format are performing well. Misbah's ton at Lords, Tresco's form this year, Collingwood still going well, Chris Rogers no spring chicken. I really think the future of cricket will involve a separation of long and short form games.

lloyd · July 2016

I'm all for a tactical battle between bowler and batsman but just read in the Sri Lanka/Aus match there was a stretch of 154 deliveries without a run being scored.....

iseverynamegone · July 2016

I've played games of Brian Lara on the PlayStation like that.

crunchman · July 2016

lloyd said:

I'm all for a tactical battle between bowler and batsman but just read in the Sri Lanka/Aus match there was a stretch of 154 deliveries without a run being scored.....

Aus were 8 down and just trying to hold out for a draw. If they had managed to last another half hour or so bad light would probably have come to their rescue.

Heartfeltdawn · July 2016

lloyd said:

I'm all for a tactical battle between bowler and batsman but just read in the Sri Lanka/Aus match there was a stretch of 154 deliveries without a run being scored.....

It was utterly brilliant. 154 deliveries without a run and it was utterly absorbing. O'Keefe had done a hamstring, couldn't run, and couldn't have a runner so blocking is all he could do. The light was getting bad, the rain that had come at the end of the previous four days never arrived, Sri Lanka ran out of reviews and had a legit bad-pad turned down in the 79th over, another chance two overs later that Australia reviewed and had overturned... it was the perfect riposte to those who have recently called for 4-day Test cricket.

From a spinner's point of view, watching Sandakan bowl with Herath today was a complete delight. The wicket at Pallekele wasn't a huge turner (Galle for the next Test will be). Just like England at Lords, poor batting strategy in the first innings screwed Australia. Prior to the Galle Test, the top six for Australia averaged 60 between them in Tests. They do it on flat tracks but give them tracks with a bit of swing or a bit of turn and they topple.

crunchman · July 2016

They have gone too far in banning runners.

Heartfeltdawn · August 2016

It's one of those times when the laws look foolish in not allowing a runner for a player who was obviously incapacitated. If all sides acted honestly then the law should be changed. The reality is that sides would exploit it. For every case like O'Keefe when the runner would be the right option, there would be two or three more where a side looked to gain an unfair advantage.

crunchman · August 2016

Heartfeltdawn said:

It's one of those times when the laws look foolish in not allowing a runner for a player who was obviously incapacitated. If all sides acted honestly then the law should be changed. The reality is that sides would exploit it. For every case like O'Keefe when the runner would be the right option, there would be two or three more where a side looked to gain an unfair advantage.

I'm not sure a runner is ever an unfair advantage. The risk of confusion that arises surely makes them a disadvantage most of the time unless they are genuinely needed. I seem to remember some comical runouts involving runners.

scrumhalf · August 2016

Well, I never expected Pakistan to fold like that. I thought we declared too late and they should have batted the overs out.

Well done England.

Heartfeltdawn · August 2016

crunchman said:
I'm not sure a runner is ever an unfair advantage. The risk of confusion that arises surely makes them a disadvantage most of the time unless they are genuinely needed. I seem to remember some comical runouts involving runners.

Equally there were times when a patently unfit Arjuna Ranatunga asked and got runners. There's a clear advantage there as King Arjuna was not a short single specialist.

The modern laws really came about after the Strauss-Smith incident. I agree with Strauss, a runner for cramps is not right. There's a huge difference between asking for a runner when you have cramp and the one time I used a runner as I'd actually dislocated my kneecap and consequently had a knee twice the size it normally was.

Heartfeltdawn · August 2016

scrumhalf said:

Well, I never expected Pakistan to fold like that. I thought we declared too late and they should have batted the overs out.

Well done England.

Both the SL-Aus series and the Eng-Pakistan series have shown that inconsistency in Test batting is now the norm. Pakistan batted really poorly on a wicket that still wasn't doing much. Yes, some reverse swing there but it wasn't excessive and if there's a side who you think would be able to cope with reverse swing, it'd be Pakistan.

I'd put it down to T20 cricket. The attacking game has changed, bowlers are finding the marathon spells are rarer and less productive when they do happen, and collapsing in the first innings doesn't mean you lose the game (England at Edgbaston and Sri Lanka in the first Test against Australia and Palekelle. All out for 117 in under 35 overs and then less than eight days later you're celebrating a series victory).

scrumhalf · August 2016

Sadly, possessing the skill to bat for a really long time in a Test match is now a dying art. I doubt we will again see the likes of Mike Atherton batting for a fortnight to save a match like he did against South Africa.

Heartfeltdawn · August 2016

scrumhalf said:

Sadly, possessing the skill to bat for a really long time in a Test match is now a dying art. I doubt we will again see the likes of Mike Atherton batting for a fortnight to save a match like he did against South Africa.

It's not even the epic rearguards that are failing: it's an inability to play on a wicket that offers just a bit to the bowlers. England lost at Lords on a blameless pitch, Old Trafford saw Pakistan do likewise, and then Edgbaston has seen both sides fail in one of their innings on a wicket that really didn't do much.

Australia are in the same position. Before the Sri Lanka series that is still going on, the top six for Australia averaged over 60 between them. Their last four innings read 203, 161, 106, and 183, playing on wickets that offered turn but nothing dangerous or vicious. In recent years they've collapsed against a bit of swing (Trent Bridge and the infamous 47 against South Africa in 2011 where they were 21 for 9) and whined massively about anything that wasn't a shirtfront pitch (Cardiff wicket in the last Ashes). Their top six bat fine on the sort of anaemic road wickets that have been churned out recently in Australia but it does nothing to prepare them for batting overseas on wickets that offer the bowlers anything.

scrumhalf · August 2016

Well, that was an innings-and-a-half. Bloody hell.

Gassage · August 2016

If anyone's in NW8 on Thurs I am playing at Lords. Come on down.

Heartfeltdawn · August 2016

So that's the fourth innings above 400 at Trent Bridge in 50 over cricket this season.

Great outfield, pitch suited for batting, boundary dragged, in, bats that help plenty, and yet it will still be put down to "Players are stronger".

Comine that with a shitty wicket prepared for the SA-NZ Test and the recent borefest that was WI-India and really it's only been the Eng-Pakistan Test series that has served up any decent cricket.

Gassage · September 2016

Skippered MCC on the Nursery Ground y'day.

What a lovely day- 30 degrees, we lost in a close game and former Eng fly-half Rob Andrew turned out for us and tore a hammy !! (Rob's head, secnd from left in first pic)

Gassage 20* thus taking my average to a mighty 73 for the season.

It's safe to say this morning has been quite painful.

Image: https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/14265080_10153898764697066_4264082706487704282_n.jpg?oh=c99dc7dcc194d9af57bb96bcb3bf94da&oe=587829EE

Image: https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/14316891_10153898699927066_2910631184469009297_n.jpg?oh=3fa2117fcaea2236b3d5365cce91c25c&oe=583F9A55

crunchman · September 2016

Why is Joss Buttler in the test squad? He can't keep to anywhere near the required standard, and it's not like his batting has made up for it in the test / first class environment.

Gassage · September 2016

crunchman said:

Why is Joss Buttler in the test squad? He can't keep to anywhere near the required standard, and it's not like his batting has made up for it in the test / first class environment.

'Cos he's a miles better keeper than Bairstow.

scrumhalf · September 2016

Why is Batty anywhere near a playing squad?

Never mind super-duper T20 tournaments, why do we continually fail to develop decent spin bowlers? That's probably a rhetorical question.

crunchman · September 2016

Gassage said:

crunchman said:

Why is Joss Buttler in the test squad? He can't keep to anywhere near the required standard, and it's not like his batting has made up for it in the test / first class environment.

'Cos he's a miles better keeper than Bairstow.

From what I've seen Bairstow is a less bad keeper than Buttler.

In Asia, with all the standing up to the stumps they should play Bairstow as a specialist batsman and pick a proper keeper. James Foster has a higher test batting average than Vince anyway - you could improve the batting and the keeping by picking a decent keeper.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

In this Discussion

Become a Subscriber!

The cricket thread

Comments