The England Cricket Thread

Dialup said:
I said this and got shouted down, hasn't he opened before?
Click to expand...
Because you don't put your best batsman in to open, as he's facing the most difficult part of the innings and more likely to get out early. Further, your 3 and 4 should be versatile, capable of playing defensively or offensively if need be. Root is good at this. 4 is clearly his best position.
 
manic111 said:
Because you don't put your best batsman in to open, as he's facing the most difficult part of the innings and more likely to get out early. Further, your 3 and 4 should be versatile, capable of playing defensively or offensively if need be. Root is good at this. 4 is clearly his best position.
Click to expand...

Maybe not your best batsmen but you'd hope the openers could at least not get out so easily and play themselves in.
 
Dialup said:
Is that really performance of an opener? Crawley has been incredibly inconsistent.
Click to expand...
Well no, it's perfectly valid to question Crawley's place in the team, but I'm not sure you can question Duckett's at present even if I wish he was a bit more compact and defensive.

But it's odd to question either of the openers on the basis of this innings. Duckett has huge credit in the bank and Crawley is currently still going.
 
Dialup said:
Maybe not your best batsmen but you'd hope the openers could at least not get out so easily and play themselves in.
Click to expand...
I agree, but we've tried that with players like Nick Compton and he got ditched as he was considered boring. We should have stuck with him for far longer, he had the potential to be a proper test player.

Brook I like him as a personality but he's not made for this team, I would drop him and bring in a proper keeper.
Click to expand...
Sorry, what? He averages over 70! I've barely ever seen a player take so well to test cricket.
 
Tinders said:
Brooks average has to be taken with a pinch of salt. His runs came in Pakistan, flat tracks with a weakened Pakistani attack. We need a pair of Boycotts opening to at least give the hitters a fighting chance lower down.
Click to expand...
Absolutely, but while his average remains that high it's pretty hard to debate his position in the team.
 
Dialup said:
I just don't think our openers have been strong enough in this series so far to justify their position. If they're in to take the game to the bowlers and to get the runs in early, they've been at best inconsistent at that.
Click to expand...
Prior to this innings, Duckett averaged over 50 in this series, and Crawley 29.75.

They are both aggressive players, who are in the team to go out and put pressure on the opening bowlers. Playing in that way is always going to be risky, but they have been selected because they play in that style. They are trying to hit the best opening bowling partnership in the world all over the ground. The fact that their averages are that high is remarkable.

If you don't agree with the style of openers we're playing, or how the team is batting as a whole, then I'd agree with you. But given how the team are playing, and the style of openers they have chosen to select, I actually don't think many would do better than Duckett and Crawley have this series against an attack of this quality.
 
Root should have been in at three. Brooks at four. Both of the openers and Brook are quick run getters and liable to get out. Better to put Root in at 3 to allow each of them to coalesce around him.
 
Yep, one of those games where individual contributions are especially important. Marsh made the difference for Australia before Wood kept England in the game. England need someone to show up with the bat tomorrow, and two if we want to win this test.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom