• 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.

The Number 3 batsman

What type of batsman should the # 3 ideally be


  • Total voters
    16

Engle

State Vice-Captain
Should the Number 3 batsman be a grafter (Barrington, Dravid, Kallis type) or an attacker (Kanhai, Gower, Richards type) ?
 

jeevan

International 12th Man
Seems like it should depend to some extent on the 1,2.

If they are a steady pair (Greenidge-Haynes) then it sets up a nice canvas for Richards to paint a masterpiece on.
If they are prone to getting out quickly (Sehwag-Jaffer), rather have Dravid or a Kallis who can construct big edifices on sand more often than the Richards-types.

(A consistent Richards type is to die for, only 1 so far in Bradman).
 

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
The best batsman should play in a position where he will get the most beneficial conditions to bat for the longest period of time. That doesn't necessarily mean #3. If your batsmen is the best in the world against spin, and only 'pretty good' against pace, then he should play at #5. If its the other way around, then he should open or come in at #3.

It's about putting your best players in the best possible position to succeed. And the team will succeed if/when that player can score the most runs for you.

As for the original question, it depends on the team. If you have a settled opening combination, than a guy like Ponting is perfect because the opening partnership usually builds a start, and he takes it to the next step. He can play the anchor role, but he generally doesn't need to. Dravid is perfect for India because our opening is frequently unreliable, and we need a rock for people to bat around.

If Ponting were in India, I'd want him to either open, or bat down at #4-#5 - he wouldn't be the ideal #3 for us. And I'm sure Dravid wouldn't be the ideal #3 for Australia.
 
Last edited:

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
I was expecting that reply. If you're the best batsman in a Test side then you should be awesome against pace and spin IMO
 

ret

International Debutant
at #3, you not only play the quicks well but also set the tempo for the game which is important .... of the current players, Ponting is the best pick for a #3 .... Lara would have been perfect too, if he were playing

As for the Q, if I had to chose b/w an attacker and a grafter and considering that the players are for the same quality then I would go for the attacker
 

PhoenixFire

International Coach
I don't like the pidgeon-holing of players as 'Aggessive' or 'Defensive'. There are so many things that are wrong with it.
 

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
I was expecting that reply. If you're the best batsman in a Test side then you should be awesome against pace and spin IMO
Maybe, but it doesn't mean you're the best against pace in your side and the best against spin in your side. Ponting is clearly the best batsman in Australia, but I would say Clarke might be better vs. spin.

And being the best in your team doesn't really mean you're all that good in the grand scheme of things - it means you're better than the rest of the lineup (e.g, Bangladesh), so you could certainly be the best in your side and be average vs. spin, or pace.
 

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
You are right, I do reckon that the best batsmen tend to end up at 3 though. But obviously, batsmen are best batting where they are best suited, I concur.

Ideally though, I would hope my best batsman would be great at 3 :p
 

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
You are right, I do reckon that the best batsmen tend to end up at 3 though. But obviously, batsmen are best batting where they are best suited, I concur.

Ideally though, I would hope my best batsman would be great at 3 :p
I'd have to disagree. Like I said, if Ponting were in the Indian team, he'd be the best batsman right now, and I wouldn't want him at #3. When Gavaskar was batting, he was the best batsman, and he opened and I don't think I would have wanted him at #3. Same with Boycott in England.
 

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
Fair enough with Gavaskar and Boycott who are obviously going to open. But where would you bat Ponting?
 

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
Fair enough with Gavaskar and Boycott who are obviously going to open. But where would you bat Ponting?
Either have him open, or have him go at #4. In India, I think we need a rock type player whose job is to stick around and build partnerships more than anything, at #3. We don't usually get the starts Australia do. Unless he feels the most comfortable at #3, then you'd find a place for him there, because your best player does need to feel comfortable. But assuming he didn't have a big preference of his own, I'd make him open or go a little lower down.
 

sideshowtim

Banned
Never mind one of the greatest #3s of this era, Ponting is one of the greatest #3s the game has ever seen. He averages a phemomenal 66.10 from the spot. Why would you want anyone else coming in first drop?
 

Engle

State Vice-Captain
The # 3 position is a specialized position. The batsman has to go out immediately if a wkt falls or after a long wait or somewhere in between. Unlike the openers who know immediately their mandate or the late-order batsmen who have a chance to assess conditions/situation.

This makes the # 3 a pivotal position. The batsman has to either build a foundation or take the fight to the enemy and establish dominance.

And considering that the # 3 is generally selected regardless of the opening partners, would a Dravid be more suited to the current Indians than lets say a Kanhai ?
 

ret

International Debutant
If Ponting is playing for India, he would bat at 3 ... then Dravid would open or drop down to #5
 

Black_Warrior

Cricketer Of The Year
It really depends on the structure and team set up as others have pointed out! If you have two solid openers like Hayden, Langer, who are bound to give you a solid start more often than not..than someone aggressive like Ponting can really go and play his shots! However...when you have someone like Smith or Gibbs or Sehwag who are not always that consistent..than a Kallis or a Dravid is your saviour!

I once had this discussion with my friends, that if you are picking a side, and you have just one position left, the number 3 position and your options are - Dravid, Ponting or Kallis? It was an interesting discussion...most Ponting because he is a more attractive batsman to watch, he is someone who gets more attention. So it really depends on a lot of factors, infact even the number 4 and 5 also makes a difference! If you have someone like Inzamam coming in at 4...then thats also a factor that would affect the decision!
 

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
I think the answer is you need to be an adaptable player to bat at 3. If you come in a 1/10, well you need to be able to cope against the new ball, but if you come in at 1/110 you need to be able to press home your side's advantage and keep the momentum going.
I don't think the poll options cover my views on this - the ideal number 3 is a fellow who can do both - graft and play aggressively as the situation demands, coz "1 for" isn't always a big deal, but "2 for" usually is.
 
Last edited:

roseboy64

Cricket Web Content Updater
Ideally the number 3 should be comfortable against both pace and spin. Also, the ability to bat for long periods as well as play attacking is necessary.
 

Top