McRamFan Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 Cook should stay as opener, not captainKP recalled, you need a thornBairstow back and the other spinner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RLACML Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 What a load of rubbish by England. Why's KP been dropped when our middle order is so bad. .Strauss what you going to do about this then. You know fine well why Pietersen isn't playing. Can people please get over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curtains Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 Cook should stay as opener, not captainKP recalled, you need a thornBairstow back and the other spinner Bairstowe failed before why should he be a success now. Who's your spinner . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ovis aries Posted July 19, 2015 Author Share Posted July 19, 2015 Bairstowe failed before why should he be a success now. Who's your spinner .Rashid . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curtains Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 Rashid .Could give him a go I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ovis aries Posted July 19, 2015 Author Share Posted July 19, 2015 I think Jimmy is a problem , seems to have lost his spark since he broke the 400.Wood is not fit , he is a 90mph bowler , but not at the moment .We need a Johnson type fast and unpredictable , is Big Dev still around Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daaave Posted July 19, 2015 Share Posted July 19, 2015 Phew, almost got drawn back into a pointless KP debate for a second but managed to delete my reply before posting it.Bairstowe failed before why should he be a success now. Who's your spinner .I will, however, highlight the absurdity of this sentiment by pointing out that Steve Waugh averaged under 30 in his first 21 tests for Australia.To answer the question though, he may be a success now as he's had 2 more years to develop and is averaging over 100 in first class cricket this year and therefore he'll be absolutely full of confidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McRamFan Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 Bairstowe failed before why should he be a success now. Who's your spinner .why not? Rashid .thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curtains Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 Seriously what the hell happened to England. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 You know that Australia did well when people are now starting to call for what sounds like a rebuild of England, only a week after they were so beautifully triumphant in the opening game. Seriously what the hell happened to England. They went into the game hoping to bore Australia out of the series, and the wounded Aussies hit back with ferocity, the same ferocity that Australia has pretty much lived off since Boof took charge. I'm calling it now, if England are to win, they are only going to do so by fighting fire with fire. This Australia side isn't going to be bored into submission, the balance of the top order and bowling attack is too good as it stands. What seems odd is that they got it so right in the first test, and so unbelievably wrong in the second. I find it utterly bizarre that I seem to be the only one on here who has confidence in this England side though. Anyhow, to dispel this myth that Australia have been any more solid than England in terms of their top order in recent times, let's just go back and see the how they've faired in recent times (score at fall of 3rd wicket or end of innings):2nd Ashes Test: 383/3 & 254/21st Ashes Test: 180/3 & 101/32nd Australian in the Windies Test: 134/3 & 212/21st Australian in the Windies Test: 61/3 & 47/14th India in Australia Test: 400/3 & 126/33rd India in Australia Test: 115/3 & 131/32nd India in Australia Test: 121/3 & 85/31st India in Australia Test: 258/3 & 168/32nd Test against Pakistan: 75/3 & 43/31st Test against Pakistan: 158/3 & 49/33rd Australia in South Africa Test: 217/3 & 245/32nd Australia in South Africa Test: 41/3 & 153/31st Australia in South Africa Test: 72/3 & 243/3This being Australia's good period, and it was very good. Taking into account innings where teams failed to take 3 wickets off them, this gives an average of 169 runs by the fall of the third wicket over this period. This however is something of a purple patch compared to prior. It's worth noting that this all lead on from that 5-0 Ashes series in Australia:5th Ashes Test: 78/3 & 72/34th Ashes Test: 62/3 & 231/23rd Ashes Test: 106/3 & 223/32nd Ashes Test: 155/3 & 65/31st Ashes Test: 73/3 & 233/3Which gives that 141 by the fall of the 3rd wicket on average. This is already worse than what Australia has had since, and despite the trashing they handed out. The strength was not the solidity of the top order. Now consider the period of time before this:5th Ashes Test: 144/3 & 50/34th Ashes Test: 49/3 & 168/33rd Ashes Test: 129/3 & 99/32nd Ashes Test: 53/3 & 36/31st Ashes Test: 22/3 & 124/34th Australia in India Test: 106/3 & 41/33rd Australia in India Test: 151/3 & 55/32nd Australia in India Test: 57/3 & 75/31st Australia in India Test: 126/3 & 65/33rd Sri Lanka in Australia Test: 195/3 & 104/32nd Sri Lanka in Australia Test: 117/31st Sri Lanka in Australia Test: 183/3 & 153/33rd South Africa in Australia Test: 34/3 & 102/32nd South Africa in Australia Test: 55/3 & 91/31st South Africa in Australia Test: 40/32nd Trans-Tasman Test: 31/3 & 159/31st Trans-Tasman Test: 91/3 & 19/12nd South Africa in Australia Test: 193/3 & 141/31st South Africa in Australia Test: 40/3 & 13/34th India in Australia Test: 84/3 & 40/33rd India in Australia Test: 242/32nd India in Australia Test: 37/31st India in Australia Test: 159/3 & 24/3Which is an average of 94 by the fall of the third wicket, which is not good in any sense. That is over a vast number of tests as well, in varied conditions, including many "easy" matches, including a 4-0 drubbing of India, several victories by an innings and such. The simple point was that it wasn't that long ago that Australia saw themselves in the 3 for bugger all camp all too often not long ago. In any case, how's England's form in that regard recently?2nd Ashes Test: 29/3 & 42/31st Ashes Test: 43/3 & 73/32nd New Zealand in England Test: 238/3 & 62/31st New Zealand in England Test: 25/3 & 74/33rd England in the Windies Test: 38/3 & 18/32nd England in the Windies Test: 164/3 & 144/11st England in the Windies Test: 34/3 & 52/35th India in England Test: 201/34th India in England Test: 113/33rd India in England Test: 355/3 & 106/32nd India in England Test: 70/3 & 71/31st India in England Test: 154/3 Which comes to 114 average at the fall of the third wicket. Whilst that's not great, it's still not abysmal, although the most recent of recent form (against Australia and New Zealand, arguably the two form bowling attacks in World Cricket) is seemingly worrying. I actually like the look of the current England top order, and whilst some tweaks here and there might be prudent depending on circumstances, I really don't see the need for panic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McRamFan Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 Looks like Derbyshire left hander may be called up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daaave Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 Fair enough, Australia's top order was complete ***** for some time too. The selectors were making changes to it during that time though, presumably to try and fix the problem. Do you think England shouldn't make changes just because we don't particularly have any options (though Taylor did hit 290 odd today) or do you think Australia would've been better to stick with the same 4 who were failing initially? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 Fair enough, Australia's top order was complete ***** for some time too. The selectors were making changes to it during that time though, presumably to try and fix the problem. Do you think England shouldn't make changes just because we don't particularly have any options (though Taylor did hit 290 odd today) or do you think Australia would've been better to stick with the same 4 who were failing initially?Australia didn't fix their problems with the constant tinkering, it actually made the problem orders of magnitude worse. It was the tinkering that saw that run in India and such where they were dismantled repeatedly. The start of Australia's revival was actually settling things down, rather than batsmen of the month. There is no sense in constantly picking out the next in form batsmen, only to discard them after a handful of tests and start again with a side with no consistency or solidity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daaave Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 Also lets be clear, England 3 down for under 50 7 times in the last 7 tests is a worse run over a short period than anything Australia had in that extended run. And the problems are not being caused by different things, it's anything above meidocre pace bowling causing us problems - hence there wasn't such an issue last summer - and even then Ishant Sharma made us look like idiots at one point. I don't think you can ignore problems like this that are being repeatedly highlighted and exploited.It's not like I've been arguing for major surgery at the top of the order though, in fact I'd probably stick with the same side for Edgbaston, one change at a push. I am, however, growing increasingly alarmed at the same technical flaws being exposed time and time again and am far from convinced that these flaws are going to be fixed by repeatedly getting dismissed in the same manner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyinLiverpool Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 You know that Australia did well when people are now starting to call for what sounds like a rebuild of England, only a week after they were so beautifully triumphant in the opening game. They went into the game hoping to bore Australia out of the series, and the wounded Aussies hit back with ferocity, the same ferocity that Australia has pretty much lived off since Boof took charge. I'm calling it now, if England are to win, they are only going to do so by fighting fire with fire. This Australia side isn't going to be bored into submission, the balance of the top order and bowling attack is too good as it stands. What seems odd is that they got it so right in the first test, and so unbelievably wrong in the second. I find it utterly bizarre that I seem to be the only one on here who has confidence in this England side though. Anyhow, to dispel this myth that Australia have been any more solid than England in terms of their top order in recent times, let's just go back and see the how they've faired in recent times (score at fall of 3rd wicket or end of innings):2nd Ashes Test: 383/3 & 254/21st Ashes Test: 180/3 & 101/32nd Australian in the Windies Test: 134/3 & 212/21st Australian in the Windies Test: 61/3 & 47/14th India in Australia Test: 400/3 & 126/33rd India in Australia Test: 115/3 & 131/32nd India in Australia Test: 121/3 & 85/31st India in Australia Test: 258/3 & 168/32nd Test against Pakistan: 75/3 & 43/31st Test against Pakistan: 158/3 & 49/33rd Australia in South Africa Test: 217/3 & 245/32nd Australia in South Africa Test: 41/3 & 153/31st Australia in South Africa Test: 72/3 & 243/3This being Australia's good period, and it was very good. Taking into account innings where teams failed to take 3 wickets off them, this gives an average of 169 runs by the fall of the third wicket over this period. This however is something of a purple patch compared to prior. It's worth noting that this all lead on from that 5-0 Ashes series in Australia:5th Ashes Test: 78/3 & 72/34th Ashes Test: 62/3 & 231/23rd Ashes Test: 106/3 & 223/32nd Ashes Test: 155/3 & 65/31st Ashes Test: 73/3 & 233/3Which gives that 141 by the fall of the 3rd wicket on average. This is already worse than what Australia has had since, and despite the trashing they handed out. The strength was not the solidity of the top order. Now consider the period of time before this:5th Ashes Test: 144/3 & 50/34th Ashes Test: 49/3 & 168/33rd Ashes Test: 129/3 & 99/32nd Ashes Test: 53/3 & 36/31st Ashes Test: 22/3 & 124/34th Australia in India Test: 106/3 & 41/33rd Australia in India Test: 151/3 & 55/32nd Australia in India Test: 57/3 & 75/31st Australia in India Test: 126/3 & 65/33rd Sri Lanka in Australia Test: 195/3 & 104/32nd Sri Lanka in Australia Test: 117/31st Sri Lanka in Australia Test: 183/3 & 153/33rd South Africa in Australia Test: 34/3 & 102/32nd South Africa in Australia Test: 55/3 & 91/31st South Africa in Australia Test: 40/32nd Trans-Tasman Test: 31/3 & 159/31st Trans-Tasman Test: 91/3 & 19/12nd South Africa in Australia Test: 193/3 & 141/31st South Africa in Australia Test: 40/3 & 13/34th India in Australia Test: 84/3 & 40/33rd India in Australia Test: 242/32nd India in Australia Test: 37/31st India in Australia Test: 159/3 & 24/3Which is an average of 94 by the fall of the third wicket, which is not good in any sense. That is over a vast number of tests as well, in varied conditions, including many "easy" matches, including a 4-0 drubbing of India, several victories by an innings and such. The simple point was that it wasn't that long ago that Australia saw themselves in the 3 for bugger all camp all too often not long ago. In any case, how's England's form in that regard recently?2nd Ashes Test: 29/3 & 42/31st Ashes Test: 43/3 & 73/32nd New Zealand in England Test: 238/3 & 62/31st New Zealand in England Test: 25/3 & 74/33rd England in the Windies Test: 38/3 & 18/32nd England in the Windies Test: 164/3 & 144/11st England in the Windies Test: 34/3 & 52/35th India in England Test: 201/34th India in England Test: 113/33rd India in England Test: 355/3 & 106/32nd India in England Test: 70/3 & 71/31st India in England Test: 154/3 Which comes to 114 average at the fall of the third wicket. Whilst that's not great, it's still not abysmal, although the most recent of recent form (against Australia and New Zealand, arguably the two form bowling attacks in World Cricket) is seemingly worrying. I actually like the look of the current England top order, and whilst some tweaks here and there might be prudent depending on circumstances, I really don't see the need for panic. Can somebody precis this for me please? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RLACML Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 Looks like Derbyshire left hander may be called upChes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McRamFan Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 Ches?Footitts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 Also lets be clear, England 3 down for under 50 7 times in the last 7 tests is a worse run over a short period than anything Australia had in that extended run. And the problems are not being caused by different things, it's anything above meidocre pace bowling causing us problems - hence there wasn't such an issue last summer - and even then Ishant Sharma made us look like idiots at one point. I don't think you can ignore problems like this that are being repeatedly highlighted and exploited.It's not like I've been arguing for major surgery at the top of the order though, in fact I'd probably stick with the same side for Edgbaston, one change at a push. I am, however, growing increasingly alarmed at the same technical flaws being exposed time and time again and am far from convinced that these flaws are going to be fixed by repeatedly getting dismissed in the same manner.That's really quite tenuous is it not? 1st India in Australia Test: 159/3 & 24/3 2nd Ashes Test: 29/3 & 42/31st Ashes Test: 43/3 & 73/32nd New Zealand in England Test: 238/3 & 62/31st New Zealand in England Test: 25/3 & 74/33rd England in the Windies Test: 38/3 & 18/32nd England in the Windies Test: 164/3 & 144/11st England in the Windies Test: 34/3 & 52/3That's those last 7 Tests. That's an average of 74 by the fall of the 3rd wicket. Compare that to this run:1st South Africa in Australia Test: 40/32nd Trans-Tasman Test: 31/3 & 159/31st Trans-Tasman Test: 91/3 & 19/12nd South Africa in Australia Test: 193/3 & 141/31st South Africa in Australia Test: 40/3 & 13/34th India in Australia Test: 84/3 & 40/33rd India in Australia Test: 242/32nd India in Australia Test: 37/31st India in Australia Test: 159/3 & 24/3That's 7 innings with under 50 when 3 down in 9 Tests, at an average of 90 by 3 down. Another run:5th Ashes Test: 144/3 & 50/34th Ashes Test: 49/3 & 168/33rd Ashes Test: 129/3 & 99/32nd Ashes Test: 53/3 & 36/31st Ashes Test: 22/3 & 124/34th Australia in India Test: 106/3 & 41/33rd Australia in India Test: 151/3 & 55/32nd Australia in India Test: 57/3 & 75/3That's 8 Tests with 5 innings with 50 or under by 3 down at an average of 85. Yes, England is on a dire run at the moment, but they happen, and hack and slash selection isn't always the best option. Who knows, maybe Bairstow might be worth another go, but changes for changes sake aren't always the best option. Ultimately though the question always comes down to why whoever coming in is a better option than who they replace, as if the only argument is "form", the question has to be asked as to how useful that is long term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daaave Posted July 20, 2015 Share Posted July 20, 2015 Yes perhaps it's tenuous, but it helps me to highlight a specific fault in the top order against a certain kind of bowling; fast. Whether or not that is fixable at all in the short term is another debate, there are serious problems with the quality of our domestic first class game, but it would be ludicrous to not at very least be considering changes at this point.I am really not concerned about Australia's historical top order problems anyway, they may have had similar root causes to ours but they may have been completely different for all I know. In my opinion it was a tenuous argument in the first place bringing it up as (I think this is what you were getting at?) a way of saying we shouldn't be making changes. But I must confess I do enjoy looking at numbers, particularly cricket related, so I'm happy to indulge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ovis aries Posted July 20, 2015 Author Share Posted July 20, 2015 Your top order do not very often get anything but fast bowling at the start of an innings do they , they are brought up on it , that's why they are top order . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.