England's Future XI

[PY]

Hussain at 3 - 39.59
Hussain at 4 - 38.09

He doesn't lose a lot from batting at 4.

Butcher at 3 - 42.18
Butcher opening - 29.27

He loses a lot batting at the top.

Vaughan opening - 52.89
Vaughan at 4 - 26.25

He loses a lot by not opening.

I fully agree with the argument that the order should be

1, Marcus Trescothick
2, Michael Vaughan
3, Mark Butcher
4, Nasser Hussain

It's balanced, settled, all have good averages at these positions. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"

Just out of interest how many times has Vaughan batted at no. 4 because think that stat might be like most stats and slightly mis-leading.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Because it shouldn't have been succesful in the first place?

Good reasoning(!) The point is that is both was and is successful...

 

[marc71178]

I fully agree with the argument that the order should be

1, Marcus Trescothick
2, Michael Vaughan
3, Mark Butcher
4, Nasser Hussain

It's balanced, settled, all have good averages at these positions. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"

Just out of interest how many times has Vaughan batted at no. 4 because think that stat might be like most stats and slightly mis-leading.

I thought that would be raised, so may be best to look at opening vs. not:

Opening - 52.89 (40 innings)
Not - 33.95 (21 innings)

Of his 40 opening, he has 10 scores of 50+, 8 of which he's converted.
Of his 21 not, it's 4 scores of 50+, only one ton.

 

[Craig]

This is completely irrelevant, but what do people think of the young Somerset keeper/batsman Carl Gazzard?

Completely irrelevant, you should make a thread on it then if you want.

 

[Richard]

This is completely irrelevant, but what do people think of the young Somerset keeper/batsman Carl Gazzard?

Personally I think the longer Robert Turner goes on, the better!

 

[Richard]

As far as I was concerned, it wasn't broke in 2002 so it should never have been broken. Vaughan should never have been moved to the opening slot, Butcher should never have been put back to three and Hussain to four.
I've already tried to explain the misleading nature of the Butcher-position stats. Hussain, fairly conclusively, is no different at three to four.
The problem, for me, is Vaughan. He failed in his first series opening and it is beyond a question that the only reason Vaughan was succesful last summer is because he kept getting dropped.
115 v SL Lord's: dropped twice in 2 overs by Jayasuriya, the first on 28.
100 v India Lord's: dropped on 50 by Ratra (and 3 other reprieves before reaching 100)
197 v India Trent Bridge: dropped by Patel off Harbhajan on 19. Played well after that, but shouldn't have been able to.
177 v Aus Adelaide Oval: clearly caught at cover by Langer off Bichel on 19, reprieved by a courageless third-Umpire.
Yes, he scored a very good 195 at The Oval, a 156 at The MCG and a pivotal, critical 188 at SCG. Then a 156 at Edgbaston.
The quality of these innings is not in doubt, but since that 19-177 his luck has stopped, and his limitations as an opener have been exposed, repeatedly caught btw. Just like last summer, only incompetant fielding let him off.
I reckon had Vaughan stayed at four, he clearly became a better player during that 195 at The Oval, and he'd do an exceedingly good job at four. Especially now he's been given the captaincy. Good openers rarely make good captains (OK, they sometimes do, but not that often).

 

[marc71178]

As far as I was concerned, it wasn't broke in 2002 so it should never have been broken. Vaughan should never have been moved to the opening slot, Butcher should never have been put back to three and Hussain to four.

In 2002, Butcher opened once, with Vaughan, as Trescothick was injured.

Why don't you just give this up since it is clear to 99% of thr forum that Butcher is best at number3?

 

[Richard]

In 2002, Butcher opened once, with Vaughan, as Trescothick was injured.

Why don't you just give this up since it is clear to 99% of thr forum that Butcher is best at number3?

You clearly don't know me very well. I NEVER give ANYTHING up.
In 2001\02, in the India Test-series, Butcher opened and continued to do well. It is as simple as that. Then he was moved back to three and he again continued to do well at home to Sri Lanka.
Many of the forum may BELIEVE it to be true that Butcher's best at number-three, but as far as I'm concerned that's simply ignoring a clear difference in Butcher's play for most of his career between 1997 and 2000 and his play from 2001 onwards.

 

[iamdavid]

I think these will be the England XI's in 2007!

Test Matches-
1.M.E.Trescothick
2.*A.J.Strauss
3.M.A.Butcher
4.M.P.Vaughan
5.P.D.Collingwood
6.A.Flintoff
7.+C.M.W.Read
8.G.J.Batty
9.M.J.Hoggard
10.S.J.Harmison
11.J.M.Anderson

My guess is that Micheal Vaughan will find captaincy is to much for him & elect to concentrate on his batting , at this point the selectors will turn to Andrew Strauss , who will also become Trescothick's opening partner while Vaughan will replace the retired Hussain at four , Thorpe will retire & Paul Collingwood will cement himself at five.

Personally I think Harmison is rubbish but this is the side I think will be there rather than the one I would pick.

ODI's
1.M.E.Trescothick
2.A.J.Strauss
3.M.P.Vaughan
4.P.D.Collingwood
5.A.Flintoff
6.R.Clarke
7.C.M.W.Read
8.G.Batty
9.K.Ali
10.M.J.Hoggard
11.J.M.Anderson

Thats my guess:saint:

 

[Neil Pickup]

You clearly don't know me very well. I NEVER give ANYTHING up.
In 2001\02, in the India Test-series, Butcher opened and continued to do well. It is as simple as that. Then he was moved back to three and he again continued to do well at home to Sri Lanka.
Many of the forum may BELIEVE it to be true that Butcher's best at number-three, but as far as I'm concerned that's simply ignoring a clear difference in Butcher's play for most of his career between 1997 and 2000 and his play from 2001 onwards.

I'm right, you're wrong, the sky is yellow with pink spots, etc.

 

[Richard]

I think these will be the England XI's in 2007!

Test Matches-
1.M.E.Trescothick
2.*A.J.Strauss
3.M.A.Butcher
4.M.P.Vaughan
5.P.D.Collingwood
6.A.Flintoff
7.+C.M.W.Read
8.G.J.Batty
9.M.J.Hoggard
10.S.J.Harmison
11.J.M.Anderson

My guess is that Micheal Vaughan will find captaincy is to much for him & elect to concentrate on his batting , at this point the selectors will turn to Andrew Strauss , who will also become Trescothick's opening partner while Vaughan will replace the retired Hussain at four , Thorpe will retire & Paul Collingwood will cement himself at five.

Personally I think Harmison is rubbish but this is the side I think will be there rather than the one I would pick.

ODI's
1.M.E.Trescothick
2.A.J.Strauss
3.M.P.Vaughan
4.P.D.Collingwood
5.A.Flintoff
6.R.Clarke
7.C.M.W.Read
8.G.Batty
9.K.Ali
10.M.J.Hoggard
11.J.M.Anderson

Thats my guess:saint:

I don't see any point in trying to predict that far ahead - anything can happen in 4 years.

 

[Richard]

I'm right, you're wrong, the sky is yellow with pink spots, etc.

Don't quite see what the significance of this is:rolleyes:
It's not as if I haven't analysed this all before.
If we didn't believe our opinion was right, we wouldn't have it.
I have heard nothing in this discussion that I haven't thought of before, and hence I see no reason to change my opinion.

 

[Craig]

You clearly don't know me very well. I NEVER give ANYTHING up.
In 2001\02, in the India Test-series, Butcher opened and continued to do well. It is as simple as that. Then he was moved back to three and he again continued to do well at home to Sri Lanka.
Many of the forum may BELIEVE it to be true that Butcher's best at number-three, but as far as I'm concerned that's simply ignoring a clear difference in Butcher's play for most of his career between 1997 and 2000 and his play from 2001 onwards.

Trust me fellas, I have debating cricket with Richard over a year and I can assure you he is spot on and david can back me up.

 

[Mr Mxyzptlk]

Trust me fellas, I have debating cricket with Richard over a year and I can assure you he is spot on and david can back me up.

It's all opinionated, as stats would definitely suggest otherwise.

 

[Richard]

It's all opinionated, as stats would definitely suggest otherwise.

Mr. M - it's true that it's all opinion, because some stats would suggest otherwise. However, I have come to the conclusion I have not through some weird and wacky string of thoughts, I have come to it because of the simple fact that a period (albeit not a very long one) of opening was included in Butcher's renaissance as a Test-batsman.
Some people base their opinion on this simple two-part statistical fact. I base mine on a statistical fact that has a few more parts to it.
Often, simple stats are regarded as "stats" and more complicated ones are regarded as "manipulation".

 

[chris.hinton]

Rember they could be someone out there that will be in the England Squad in 2007 back in 2001 who would have thought that Anderson would be in the England Squad

Spinners are a Big problem Giles and Batty are only good Shaort term, hopefully a Leg spinner or An off Spinner will come though

(Dont take the pee out of me because i mensioned a leg spinner)

Marc71178 if Giles is still in the England Team by 2007 then i will give up

 

[gibbsnsmith]

if Giles is still in at 2007, i will also be playing for England...and thats a good point about the team for 2007 as whoi knows who can pop up like Clarke...

As for the Anderson comment, i say me, i had heard of him long ago but only as a decent bowler with potential to make i into England Squad in a few years time...

 

[marc71178]

Marc71178 if Giles is still in the England Team by 2007 then i will give up

It's not that far away, and if another bowler doesn't come along, he could very well be there.

At times playing a spinner doesn't look a good option, and if we had another batsman who was semi-decent, I'd happily see us go 6-1-4 with the 4 being seamers (this'd probably mean Read at 8), but we don't.

 

[PY]

hopefully a Leg spinner or An off Spinner will come though

Is there any other types of spinner?

 

[Prince EWS]

Is there any other types of spinner?

I was going to say that, but I was sure someone would say:

Left Arm Chinaman
Slow Left Arm Orthodox Spin
Chris Harris

But I am sure he said that just to bring up leg spinners...