England cricket 2019 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter tisza
- Start date
Paul Anthony
Well-Known Member
Roy's been dropped, along with Overton. Curran and Woakes replacing them.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
Bit harsh on Overton IMO
Gazolba
Well-Known Member
Positive changes I'd say.
Let's just hope they get the batting order right.
Gazolba
Well-Known Member
Why? His figures were 2 for 107.
He's primarily a bowler remember.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Assassinating Smith is about the only chance
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
Just seems a tiny bit harsh after only being given the one test in which all of he bowlers returned quite poor figures. Pretty much the entire batting line-up shouldn't be there on those grounds.
I admit I do think Curran and Woakes are better overall so I like them in the team (esp Curran on his home ground) but Woakes was given the first three tests and didn't exactly do great shakes either so I'd have maybe persisted with Overton to give him more experience.
It's not a major thing, it's just if they decided to make the change for the last test why change it back now? Unless Woakes had a small injury for the last test they didn't want to risk, or Overton has one now of course.
Saddlebrains
Well-Known Member
Am i the only one who thinks leach isnt that bad a batsman? Should be batting above archer in my eyes. Proven hes decent
Grendel
Well-Known Member
It’s a bit odd as until the test arena his stats have been useless
Paul Anthony
Well-Known Member
I can see the merits in moving him up the order slightly, given how we've spent this entire series crying out for someone who could go in and just stay there, taking some pressure off our "better" batsmen and frustrating their bowling attack.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
He's got technical deficiencies but tries to bat properly. Others are technically brilliant but don't seem to try to bat properly and just end up swinging at things.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
A rare batting positive in this series is Burns actually coming through, and justifying his place.
It's still not exactly a stellar average, but compared to everything around him, he's done alright!
Now we just need to find him a partner. Have visions of Denly doing just enough to cling on, and really not sure he's the answer.
tisza
Well-Known Member
Basics are there with Burns - showed it in patches over the winter too. Does need to kick on.
Again it is still a very good Aussie new ball attack.
SBAndy
Well-Known Member
Really think Sibley will come in. Wouldn’t mind seeing Denly batting at 3 considering his last couple of performances. Root back to 4, drop one of Buttler and Bairstow. Also, is this the watershed moment for Anderson’s retirement?
The Great Eastern
Well-Known Member
Not a chance of this match being a draw given there are 2 full days play to go.
Paul Anthony
Well-Known Member
Shame for Denly not to get his century, but I think him and Burns have some potential as a partnership going forward.
I know Paine was a bit review happy in other tests this series, but now he's gone to the other extreme. Lucky for us, to get away with those two.
I know Paine was a bit review happy in other tests this series, but now he's gone to the other extreme. Lucky for us, to get away with those two.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
Think he meant draw the series
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
Good to at least not lose the series.
Who would everyone's team of the tournament be?
For me:
Burns
Denly
Labuschagne
Smith
Root
Stokes
Bairstow (wk)
Cummins
Hazlewood
Archer
Lyon
Openers were all dire in the main but Burns and Denly were starting to settle in by the end of the tournament. Aussies were always terrible.
Main end batsmen had to be Smith, Labuschagne who look a composed and sensible batter when he came in for the injured Smith.
Final batting place is probably between Root and Wade, although neither were particularly great. Wade was terrible with the bat apart from his two centuries. Root got 4 50's but no tons, but he did take more catches and is a bit more useful as an emergency bowler. Looking at averages you could even say bringing in the likes of wither Marsh or Starc would be worthwhile ahead of either of them, with the added bonus of their bowling but as both only played one test it's hard to say they should get a place in the team.
Stokes was an effective middle order batsman and his ability to bowl as well just increases his value. Almost worth his place for Headingly alone.
Keeper - both were awful but Bairstow had a slightly better time with the bat and Paine's reviewing was terrible. I even thought of putting in Buttler even though he didn't keep wicket during the series but his averages were massaged due to some half decent scores in the last two tests playing more one-day like with the tail.
Cummins and Hazlewood have to be the two main quicks - by far the two most consistently effective.
Archer is third because he could be devastating in spells but was struggling with consistency and IMO we became over-reliant on him and over-used him. Batting he didn't look particularly great or disciplined but he does bring that air of excitement with him. Again you could say Marsh or Starc could be considered ahead of him but on one test probably not fair to drop him for them.
Spinner is a throw up. Similar overall averages considering Leach played one test less and he's got that cult hero status of sticking around with the bat, plus Lyon missed that chance at Headingley. Leach will be probably be the more memorable of the two from the series but ultimately Lyon was just a bit better.
Who would everyone's team of the tournament be?
For me:
Burns
Denly
Labuschagne
Smith
Root
Stokes
Bairstow (wk)
Cummins
Hazlewood
Archer
Lyon
Openers were all dire in the main but Burns and Denly were starting to settle in by the end of the tournament. Aussies were always terrible.
Main end batsmen had to be Smith, Labuschagne who look a composed and sensible batter when he came in for the injured Smith.
Final batting place is probably between Root and Wade, although neither were particularly great. Wade was terrible with the bat apart from his two centuries. Root got 4 50's but no tons, but he did take more catches and is a bit more useful as an emergency bowler. Looking at averages you could even say bringing in the likes of wither Marsh or Starc would be worthwhile ahead of either of them, with the added bonus of their bowling but as both only played one test it's hard to say they should get a place in the team.
Stokes was an effective middle order batsman and his ability to bowl as well just increases his value. Almost worth his place for Headingly alone.
Keeper - both were awful but Bairstow had a slightly better time with the bat and Paine's reviewing was terrible. I even thought of putting in Buttler even though he didn't keep wicket during the series but his averages were massaged due to some half decent scores in the last two tests playing more one-day like with the tail.
Cummins and Hazlewood have to be the two main quicks - by far the two most consistently effective.
Archer is third because he could be devastating in spells but was struggling with consistency and IMO we became over-reliant on him and over-used him. Batting he didn't look particularly great or disciplined but he does bring that air of excitement with him. Again you could say Marsh or Starc could be considered ahead of him but on one test probably not fair to drop him for them.
Spinner is a throw up. Similar overall averages considering Leach played one test less and he's got that cult hero status of sticking around with the bat, plus Lyon missed that chance at Headingley. Leach will be probably be the more memorable of the two from the series but ultimately Lyon was just a bit better.
CrawleySkyBlue
Well-Known Member
Generally in agreement, although i’d say Broad has had a decent series and should be included in there somewhere.
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
The batsmen were pretty easy to decide but there was a case for most of the bowlers, inc Broad. who did take the most wickets for Eng but also played the most tests. If someone had chosen him instead of Archer I wouldn't have much of an issue, but I don't think either of them should be picked ahead of Cummins and Hazlewood and it didn't seem right to pick a team with no spinners other than part-timers.
Sky Blue Pete
Well-Known Member
Curran unlucky to miss out until final test
Terry Gibson's perm
Well-Known Member
Silverwood new head coach must be a shortage of candidates
Covstu
Well-Known Member
Pleased it was an English appointment but doesn’t inspire me much
