Cricket

[kaosmark2]

I love Moeen. 2nd top scorer and nabs Elgar and Amla with the ball. Awesome stuff.

Beeb just reporting that Rabada has been banned for the 2nd Test. Big loss for SA, even if he hasn't been great so far.

[kaosmark2]

This is a good game, but poor batting from England. 

Woakes out of the rest of the series now. Could definitely do with him.

[TheGayTent]

Desperately need an opener and a number 3 to appear from nowhere as if by magic. 

Love Trent Bridge - easy to get to/from, close enough to the city centre, knowledgeable crowd, and very reasonably priced. Pity about the weather but apart from that, an enjoyable two days. 

[pink_triangle]

2 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

Desperately need an opener and a number 3 to appear from nowhere as if by magic. 

Love Trent Bridge - easy to get to/from, close enough to the city centre, knowledgeable crowd, and very reasonably priced. Pity about the weather but apart from that, an enjoyable two days. 

Trent Bridge is my favourite test ground. I grew up predominantly at Old Trafford but always found too many idiots in the crowd. There is also a bus stop outside my house that goes straight there!

[TheGayTent]

2 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

Trent Bridge is my favourite test ground. I grew up predominantly at Old Trafford but always found too many idiots in the crowd. There is also a bus stop outside my house that goes straight there!

Think it has too many negatives (size, badly designed in terms of bottlenecks, hideous looking pavilion etc) to be my favourite, but it's definitely better than the other test grounds that lie further North. 

Although I'd like to re-visit that opinion when the redevelopment at OT is finished. 

[mjsell]

On 16/07/2017 at 9:42 AM, TheGayTent said:

Desperately need an opener and a number 3 to appear from nowhere as if by magic.

What's your opinion on where England should go from here regarding 2 and 3?

Stick with Jennings or take a look at other options? At this point are the options even worth looking at?

[TheGayTent]

24 minutes ago, mjsell said:

What's your opinion on where England should go from here regarding 2 and 3?

Stick with Jennings or take a look at other options? At this point are the options even worth looking at?

Unusually, I have a lot of sympathy with the selectors. They wanted to pick Hameed who had a great season last season and looked good on tour. Despite an atrocious season to date he was even given a spot in the lions team but failed again. So he has made himself almost unpickable. 

Root then chose his mate - who has failed again. 

[kaosmark2]

Hameed's county form is the sad thing. He was everyone's first choice but hasn't passed 50 all season, including for the lions. Once he has a good season again I'm sure he'll be back for England, but bringing him back when he's in atrocious form would be crazy.

And regarding bringing someone back in atrocious form, I feel Ballance's last stint has harmed him this time. His county form justified a case for him which Root pushed through, but he's not impressing so far.

I'd bring Stoneman in, not too sure whether I'd drop Jennings or Ballance (or even neither and shuffle the batting down). Sam Robson's doing well again and I felt was dropped slightly prematurely last time, but it seems he's not on the selector's radar. Nick Browne's done well with Cook for Essex this season, but only really has this season as experience in division one.

 

The big issue is we need an extra batsman, but who bats 8? Moeen averages 25 at 8, lower than anywhere in the line-up except opening. Do you push Bairstow down? Or bring in a one-day batsman like Butler at 8?

Bizarrely, having so many all-rounders is causing problems with finding a good team balance. 2 of our 5 bowlers are taking up batting spots.

[TheGayTent]

I don't think county form necessarily justifies test inclusion. Many successful test players didn't stand out in county cricket, and many that did stand out have failed. Like most things statistics are nothing without interpretation. 

I'm a great believer in giving players a proper run but for me both Ballance and Jennings have obvious technical flaws. I'd drop both pronto and only bring them back if they go away and work on correcting them. People bang on about Jennings' century on debut but forget he was a dolly away from getting a pair. 

The convicts will be happy...

 

[kaosmark2]

10 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

I don't think county form necessarily justifies test inclusion. Many successful test players didn't stand out in county cricket, and many that did stand out have failed. Like most things statistics are nothing without interpretation. 

I'm a great believer in giving players a proper run but for me both Ballance and Jennings have obvious technical flaws. I'd drop both pronto and only bring them back if they go away and work on correcting them. People bang on about Jennings' century on debut but forget he was a dolly away from getting a pair. 

The convicts will be happy...

 

I agree. It's a hint though, and you shouldn't bring someone in out of form. There's also the question of who is pushing to come in. It's primarly Stoneman isn't it?

Convicts still struggling with wage negotiations.

 

[TheGayTent]

2 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

I agree. It's a hint though, and you shouldn't bring someone in out of form. There's also the question of who is pushing to come in. It's primarly Stoneman isn't it?

Agreed.

2 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

Convicts still struggling with wage negotiations.

It will get resolved before the Ashes. 

[Wagon]

I think Jennings deserves a least one more test, 

I'd give Moeen a go at number 3, bats there for Worcs and since he apparently isn't the No. 1 spinner might as well try him out there.

Cook, Jennings, Ali, Root, Ballance, Stokes, Bairstow seems a better way to order the current line up to me 

[TheGayTent]

11 minutes ago, Wagon said:

I think Jennings deserves a least one more test, 

I'd give Moeen a go at number 3, bats there for Worcs and since he apparently isn't the No. 1 spinner might as well try him out there.

Cook, Jennings, Ali, Root, Ballance, Stokes, Bairstow seems a better way to order the current line up to me 

I think Moeen has proved he isn't the answer at the top of the order against the new ball. 

[pink_triangle]

2 hours ago, TheGayTent said:

I don't think county form necessarily justifies test inclusion. Many successful test players didn't stand out in county cricket, and many that did stand out have failed. Like most things statistics are nothing without interpretation. 

I think Trescothick (although my memory may be failing me) had pretty medicore county championship form before having a good test career.  On the other side Englands past are littered with player who seemed cant fail prospects from county cricket such as Hick, Ramprakash and Key.

[TheGayTent]

1 minute ago, pink_triangle said:

I think Trescothick (although my memory may be failing me) had pretty medicore county championship form before having a good test career. 

Strauss is the most obvious one. 

1 minute ago, pink_triangle said:

On the other side Englands past are littered with player who seemed cant fail prospects from county cricket such as Hick, Ramprakash and Key.

Key was very harshly treated 

[kaosmark2]

2 hours ago, Wagon said:

I think Jennings deserves a least one more test, 

I'd give Moeen a go at number 3, bats there for Worcs and since he apparently isn't the No. 1 spinner might as well try him out there.

Cook, Jennings, Ali, Root, Ballance, Stokes, Bairstow seems a better way to order the current line up to me 

 

2 hours ago, TheGayTent said:

I think Moeen has proved he isn't the answer at the top of the order against the new ball. 

I love Moeen, but batting at 3 for Worcestershire for a mediocre division 2 side is a huge difference from doing it in tests. He's proven he's a fantastic number 7, and that he struggles in the top order. Keep him in the spot where he averages over 80!

[TheGayTent]

1 hour ago, kaosmark2 said:

 

I love Moeen, but batting at 3 for Worcestershire for a mediocre division 2 side is a huge difference from doing it in tests. He's proven he's a fantastic number 7, and that he struggles in the top order. Keep him in the spot where he averages over 80!

To be fair, he does average over 50 at number 4. 

[kaosmark2]

6 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

To be fair, he does average over 50 at number 4. 

True enough, but it's over a lot smaller sample size.

[TheGayTent]

8 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

True enough, but it's over a lot smaller sample size.

True enough, but at 4 his stats aren't skewed by the number of NOs he has got by batting with bunnies....

[kaosmark2]

57 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

True enough, but at 4 his stats aren't skewed by the number of NOs he has got by batting with bunnies....

Although by that argument his stats at 8 would be a lot less shit.

[TheGayTent]

43 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

Although by that argument his stats at 8 would be a lot less shit.

Not really - at some point the balance falls the other way because he hasn't the time and runs out of partners to get any partnerships going. 

[kaosmark2]

50 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

Not really - at some point the balance falls the other way because he hasn't the time and runs out of partners to get any partnerships going. 

I do understand your points, devils advocate aside, where would you bat him? 4/5/7?

[TheGayTent]

26 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

I do understand your points, devils advocate aside, where would you bat him? 4/5/7?

Depends on fitness and form (his as well as team mates) together with pitch and overhead conditions doesn't it.

But yes, devils advocate aside, I probably agree with you in that most of the time, I'd pick him at 7. 

The only reason it's even a debate is because of poor form elsewhere in the batting order. 

[TheGayTent]

Westley in for Ballance then

[kaosmark2]

Yup. Bringing in a right-hander makes sense, particularly as he's scored a fair few of his runs this season alongside Cook.

I don't get the Malan call-up. He's another attacking stroke-player.