• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Joe Root captaincy thread

Jack1

International Debutant
That line up still only has Root likely to average over 40 in a Test career.
Cupboard is bare. You can only pick the best players available to you. We can't pick Hobbs, Sutcliffe and Hutton as the top 3. Those guys are retired. Suspect Denly will get a run now with Burns. He's fortunate he was dropped on 0. That's life.
 

91Jmay

International Coach
He is a wretched captain, it's often a very easy scapegoat when a team aren't performing but some of the field settings/plans & bowling choices were so baffling. No other option though so probably holds on by default.
 

Second Spitter

State Vice-Captain
If Root was captain of Australia, I believe Australia would have been more successful... ....... apart from ending the career of Pat Cummins,
 

Jack1

International Debutant
He is a wretched captain, it's often a very easy scapegoat when a team aren't performing but some of the field settings/plans & bowling choices were so baffling. No other option though so probably holds on by default.
Burns captains Surrey. He is a clear option. Burns is likely to play 50 more tests so it's not like making fringe player captain either.
 

Stapel

International Regular
He is a wretched captain, it's often a very easy scapegoat when a team aren't performing but some of the field settings/plans & bowling choices were so baffling. No other option though so probably holds on by default.
Makes me wonder: The field settings/plans are not conjured up during the game! At least they should not be, in any half decent professional team. I'ld like to think 80 to 90% of the situations are more or less standard situations. If we assume JR's captaincy is sub standard, where does he go wrong? Not having a plan? Not sticking to it? Or not reading the right situation, and coming up with something special?
 

Lillian Thomson

Hall of Fame Member
Makes me wonder: The field settings/plans are not conjured up during the game! At least they should not be, in any half decent professional team. I'ld like to think 80 to 90% of the situations are more or less standard situations. If we assume JR's captaincy is sub standard, where does he go wrong? Not having a plan? Not sticking to it? Or not reading the right situation, and coming up with something special?
You don't think the fielding positions are mainly evolved due to the state of the game? Maybe he did pre-plan having one slip to the Number 9 when over 150 were needed.
 

Stapel

International Regular
You don't think the fielding positions are mainly evolved due to the state of the game? Maybe he did pre-plan having one slip to the Number 9 when over 150 were needed.
Of course they evolve due to the state of the game! But how many times does the state of the game bring you to a situation you didn't think of onebeforehand?

As to your example: needing one wicket with a bucket load of runs to play with, is a fairly standard situation, not? So what happens there? There must be (senior) team members informing him there is pretty standard situation on! Where does it go wrong?
 
Last edited:

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Burns captains Surrey. He is a clear option. Burns is likely to play 50 more tests so it's not like making fringe player captain either.
Burns still averages under 30 for 12 Tests, let him concentrate on guaranteeing a long term spot first. Could quite easily have a horror winter and be out of the side by April.
 

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Taken in isolation I think Burns actually looked pretty ordinary and had a lot of luck to make the runs that he did. In the context of the series and compared to other openers though he looks a lot rosier.

I definitely wouldn't be locking him into the side because of this series. Michael Carberry played better in 2013/14 and then was never seen from again.
 

vcs

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Looked better as the series went on though, especially against the short ball at his body ploy. Always good to have a guy who doesn't keep making the same mistakes over and over again, plus he seems an excellent catcher.
 

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
He's probably one of the first picked atm tbh, but that's more a sign of how bad the rest have been
 

SteveNZ

Cricketer Of The Year
If you can find an opener with mental toughness, you hold onto him. He'll develop. Rory Burns does look like you could get him out 30 ways every ball, but he's clearly a very mentally strong player. I think he benefits from being a late starter in the Test arena and knowing his game a lot more than a young, potentially more 'gifted' player.
 

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
A 40 average for an opener against that Oz attack is not to be sniffed at. I'm not looking it up but I don't reckon Carbwrry came close to averaging that. Happy to be proved wrong
 

Lillian Thomson

Hall of Fame Member
No one averaged 40 in that series for England. Only Stokes averaged over 30. Carberry just made a load of 30’s and 40’s and one half century.
 

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
A 40 average for an opener against that Oz attack is not to be sniffed at. I'm not looking it up but I don't reckon Carbwrry came close to averaging that. Happy to be proved wrong
Carberry was England's second best bat behind Pietersen. Averaged in the 30s IIRC (edit: 28.1), opening the batting against 2013/14 Mitchell Johnson. Having watched both series I can tell you that Carberry in 2013/14 ****s all over Burns in 2019. And if we're talking about openers with mental toughness it's hard to beat Carberry that series.

I'm not saying this to talk down Burns, as I said he's one of the first picked at this stage. Just pointing out that the reason for that is more because of how bad the rest have been, and that Carberry was canned having been just as good, or better.
 
Last edited:

SteveNZ

Cricketer Of The Year
Carberry was England's second best bat behind Pietersen. Averaged in the 30s IIRC (edit: 28.1), opening the batting against 2013/14 Mitchell Johnson. Having watched both series I can tell you that Carberry in 2013/14 ****s all over Burns in 2019. And if we're talking about openers with mental toughness it's hard to beat Carberry that series.

I'm not saying this to talk down Burns, as I said he's one of the first picked at this stage. Just pointing out that the reason for that is more because of how bad the rest have been, and that Carberry was canned having been just as good, or better.
But isn't that revisionist bias? Carberry, as you say, averaged 28. Burns averaged 39, and scored a ton + two 50s. Carberry's best was 60, his only half century. Could argue Carberry faced better attacks but gee, Cummins is bowling near as well as any bowler ever has, Hazelwood had a great series, Lyon offers the off-spin away across him threat, Burns had a lot to deal with too.
 

Victor Ian

International Coach
I, for one, look forward to seeing how Burns develops. Give him a run and let other names force their way in. I don't care how awkward Burns looks. He has grown on me and I admired his ability to stick it out when things were tough. Sure, he could have been out many times. But where Warner was, he wasn't. That says a lot.
 

stephen

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Carberry and Pieterson were the two standout batsmen England had for that series. Neither should have been dropped for it (And KP obviously wasn't dropped for that series but it gave them a good way to get rid of him). But Burns was better this series than Carberry from a *results* point of view. Stick with him.
 

Top