Cricket
- Thread starter summerisle
- Start date
Just hit a ton off 50 balls.
I really can't get the Bairstow thinking at all. I mean on the whole I actually quite like Ed Smith as a selector. He's willing to make tough, at times unconvetional calls. He reminds me a bit of Duncan Fletcher in that regard (I appreciate he was coach not selector). I can't fathom the Bairstow thing though.
He's come in and was instrumental in England winning the last match. Two really solid innings under enormous pressure. He's in England best 6 batsman too. I appreciate, that in a stellar line up you'd look at his flaws and say he wasn't, but with this line up he is. He's worked hard in rounding some of the edges that ade him more suitable for white ball cricket. I see that as a positive too, that when he gets in, he can be destructive. We are very glass half empty in England, whereas I prefer the more Australian glass half full- which is what can the guy do if he gets in, rather what doesn't he do when he gets out.
More broadly he has been mesed about. He was a very good keeper batsman at 6 or 7. He lost the gloves needlessly in my view, he didn't do a lot wrong. He was then accused of being prickly, which he could have been but you could understand why. He then got shunted up the order to 3, made a hundred and found himself dropped again, for a lad like Denly who for all his positives just wasn't the same calibre of batsman. He's back in again now, and done his job, and again he's the fall guy. It just smacks of favouritism again at the moment.
You're right of course. If they're view is he's not a test player, then fine. If there's a slot that needs to be filled for 2 games and they see Sibley/Burns as the longerm options, then play Bracey. He's carried the drinks all summer and is a young batsman who will benefit from some exposure. Find out a bit about him. I don't know what we find out about Bairstow from this?
As a final aside I don't like the inconsistency with selection. Burns and Sibley make a hundred and thats then inked in for seemingly years to come. Bairstow does the same and it's an easy drop. I don't really understand it myself. I think people have this perception he can't play red ball cricket, which seems to be based on how good he is in white ball cricket, rather than his abilities in the red ball game.
Bit worrying how reliant they still are on Broad and Anderson. The spinners aren't consistent enough and they miss Stokes for a big wicket in the middle overs.
Can see them going with Anderson/Broad (rotating), Archer, Stokes, Mo, Leach in India. Possibly even space for Woakes as well with Ali and him at 7 & 8 in the order. I just can't see how they can continue to select Bess above Ali. A poor out of form Mo is better than Bess with bat and ball.
Can see them going with Anderson/Broad (rotating), Archer, Stokes, Mo, Leach in India. Possibly even space for Woakes as well with Ali and him at 7 & 8 in the order. I just can't see how they can continue to select Bess above Ali. A poor out of form Mo is better than Bess with bat and ball.
Yep, totally agree with all of that. I can understand why he was dropped, as you say, he does have weaknesses and he had a poor run of form. In an ideal world you'd have found someone better and that would have been the end of him. Like you though, I just don't see how he can be dropped now. I would have had no issue with them not taking him to Sri Lanka to give Bracey or whoever else a chance, but once he's been picked not to just to go but to play, and has made a vital contribution to winning the only game they've played, I just can't for the life of me see how he then drops out of the squad altogether. It's not good management in my eyes, and i'm not sure what his motivation is going to be like for this game.
Chris O'Connor
Player Valuation: £35m
It takes an exceptionally poor performance to win the toss and not win the game in Galle, Sri Lanka managed to pull that off in the first test but it's asking for miracles to repeat the feat.
Root lost the test at the toss.
Root lost the test at the toss.
Last edited:
Unfortunately it looks like this
I’ve always thought that the opposition should be able to choose who bats first as the home team already has many advantages. Or they just alternate choice. Is a very antiquated method of doing things.
Chris O'Connor
Player Valuation: £35m
Two consecutive one-off test matches instead of playing a series are a joke, the best side won't always win there are far too many variables over such a short time.
Two tests aren't a series and never have been, it's why the test championship is doomed to failure and rankings only a very rough and horribly inadequate guide.
Yes essentially that. I'm not even against them "dropping someone in" to find a bit out about them. In think the rotation policy is actually quite sensible. The rigours of the modern game, and that we take one day cricket seriously demands that you have a squad. No issue with that, I actually think it's quite forward thinking from England. You learn nothing new from Bairstow though, and Sri Lanka away is not really a serious that it makes sense to just stick a stop gap in. I'd have honestly preferred to see Bracey get a couple of games if that was the route they intended to go down. Like Lawrence he did very well in an A your to Australia (not quite as well as Lawrence) but it feels there's a big upside and little downside to giving him 2 games. Even if he struggles, he has time to go away and improve his game.
I'd pick Bairstow. I suppose my vanity means I often daydream when driving home from work and think about what I'd do with the team. Last summer I came to the view I don't really fancy the two openers. England have an abundance of excellent mid-lower middle order players but a dearth of top order guys. Root, Bairstow, Butler, Stokes, Pope etc are all great nubers 4-7. Bairstow opens up in 1 day cricket and has a century at 3. It wasn't an ideal pick, but it was enough. We are not dealing with a situation whereby there re openers scoring runs all over the shop domestically. Unless one of the other above guys fancies batting in the top 3, he felt the best solution we had. Whats happened thus far this series has just cemented it that to me.
I'm quite bold, and for the Ashes I would be working on him opening with Crawley, Pope/Lawrence at 3 the other at 5.
Just to play devils advocate a bit mate, but do you not think home advantage is a great leveller and makes it more interesting? In a normal series, England probabaly win comfortably against Sri Lanka, but home advantage brings in all options.
I also think the game is still there to be won, but it's not easy to win anywhere in the sub continent. Even when they are going through a low moment as they are, Sri Lanka remaina tough nut to crack. I think losing Ali was important for England. We look a spinner light to me. Him in place of Curran would have helped.
The game is still there for England though, if you can whittle them out for 350 ish you have a chance to make a big score.
Agree, should be a minimum of three games in a test series. If you go one down there should be the opportunity to bounce back and win series.
Chris O'Connor
Player Valuation: £35m
No the wickets in Galle make bat first and win the match a no brainer, you have to be truly awful to mess it up.
I get what you are saying, and there's no doubt it's a bat first pitch. England are still in the game for me, but will have to play well.
I mean devils advocate, but is it not the same at Headingly say if it's overcast day 1. Bowl first, whittle them out cheaply, win the game?