• 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.

Batting order in order of best to worst, rather than specialist position

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
Top thread, i guess some top teams could get away with it. But in cricket specialist postions have great importance thats why for example in Australia's ODI team over the years with Gilchrist yea he could come in @ 6 or 7 & be destructive just like he has been in test cricket, but in ODI's given the field restrictions & power-plays with his ability to score runs in that period of the game & the aura of him coming out to bat (which has had a strong psycological effect on teams) you would always want him to do so.

But then you look at some lesser sides like the West Indies where Lara being their best batsman. In the ODI format even though he showed early in his career that he could be a top ODI opener, it would have been foolish for the windies to let him open since for opponents psycological they would think we get Lara early the windies are overw which in most cases even though he had batsmen like Hooper, Chanderpaul, Gayle, Richardson they didn't always come to the party.

So overall i'd say it could work depending on the ability of your batsmen to adapt to different batting positions or roles but if your side lacks that versatily & is a bit one player dependent its a no no.
 

Perm

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Still was against the worlds best bowling attack, and the first double century by an Englishman in ages. Outscored Bell by 140 runs in that innings, and survived in the second innings where everyone else failed.
So, since English batsmen haven't been able to score double centuries, you'll give Collingwood extra credit? Didn't Rob Key hit one against the West Indies only a few years earlier? Hardly 'ages'. Yeah, Collingwood did score more than Bell. Does that make the pitch any less flat? Not at all.

Where Bell made 10 runs for twice out, Collingwood 170 runs for no outs.
Again, Collingwood scored more than Bell. Does that change the fact that the attack wasn't that good, and the pitch pretty flat? Nope.

Could've sworn Richard was banned. Oh, right, it's Perichard.
That last sentence was a joke. Given how much Richard slags off Collingwood, I would've thought it was obvious.

Anyway, was just winding Jamee up for a start. Bell and Collingwood are both reasonable Test batsmen, not anything more.
 

Perm

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Yep its quite bizarre, Perm has become Richard:unsure:

Collingwood has out-performed Bell in every way over the last few years, despite skewed stats.
I'm not Richard, I was just having a joke ;)

But yeah, I agree, Collingwood has been better in the last two years, although neither have been anything other than solid.
 

aussie

Hall of Fame Member
So, since English batsmen haven't been able to score double centuries, you'll give Collingwood extra credit? Didn't Rob Key hit one against the West Indies only a few years earlier? Hardly 'ages'. Yeah, Collingwood did score more than Bell. Does that make the pitch any less flat? Not at all.
Come on yo, any west indies bowling attack since Ambrose/Walsh retired has been poor, how could you even compare Key hundred to Collingwood's is totally off the mat son lift your game playa.

Let me tell ya also son Collingwood's double was the first double & Englishman scored againts a real quality bowling attack since Hussain's double in the 97 Ashes although Trescothick scored 219 @ the Oval in 03 & Thorpe's 200 vs NZ in that superb test in 2002 although quality innings those where againts average attacks in the case of thorpe or a very flat deck in the case of Trescothick.


Again, Collingwood scored more than Bell. Does that change the fact that the attack wasn't that good, and the pitch pretty flat? Nope.
Attack wasn't good?WTF what was so poor about that attack. The pitch was flat yea but their have been many flat pitches over the years that the Australian bowling attack with McGrath/Warne leading the charge have been able to restrict even better batting line-ups plus even though England made over 500 its not as if Australia bowled crap give Colly & KP their credit yo..
 

NZTailender

I can't believe I ate the whole thing
That last sentence was a joke. Given how much Richard slags off Collingwood, I would've thought it was obvious.

Anyway, was just winding Jamee up for a start. Bell and Collingwood are both reasonable Test batsmen, not anything more.
It just annoys me that you, like a lot of people on this site, will dismiss an innings like it's nothing because of the pitch being flat, or the standard of the bowling attack, or of dropped catches. It seems there are no actual good innings anymore, as everything is on a flat track or against terrible bowlers or every player has a heap of dropped catches.

The only thing that is obvious here is you read far too much into statistics and try and find holes in an innings, rather than watching and enjoying the game of cricket.
 

LongHopCassidy

International Captain
It just annoys me that you, like a lot of people on this site, will dismiss an innings like it's nothing because of the pitch being flat, or the standard of the bowling attack, or of dropped catches. It seems there are no actual good innings anymore, as everything is on a flat track or against terrible bowlers or every player has a heap of dropped catches.

The only thing that is obvious here is you read far too much into statistics and try and find holes in an innings, rather than watching and enjoying the game of cricket.
AWTA. The last few 'good' innings that relied on none of those were Chanderpaul's 116, Dravid's pair of fifties in the West Indies, Kamran Akmal's 123 against India and Ponting's 156 in 2005.

Coincidentally, they're also all-time great innings. :p
 

Top