***Official*** England in India

[Daemon]

Jonathan Bairstow ‏@jbairstow21
Just had my chest waxed: really don't know what you girls go on about!! It's not that bad!! #gees #manup


>.>

[theegyptian]

good to see bairstow using his time productively.

[Howe_zat]

Assuming they're batting at 6 then I'd rather have Prior than Kes.

[marc71178]

Wherever they're batting I'd rather have Prior than Kieswetter - think CK's just not good enough.

[Howe_zat]

When Prior was dropped for CK he was doing okay, they just wanted to have CK opening because that's where all his one-day credentials are, and Prior opening has never worked. It made sense. Even last year he seemed to have a decent opening partnership with Cook, even though I wasn't happy with his keeping and wanted KP there. Now that we have a surplus of openers in the side he's been moved down for no reason other than they don't know who to play and he was there, not because he's honestly been thought of as the best man for the job.

[Cabinet96]

Kieswetter suffered really from KP and Bell's needs. Like Howe said, he was really only picked to bat in the middle order because he was already in the team, and they obviously didn't, and still don't, fully trust Buttler or Bairstow's keeping.

India's ranked no 1 in ODIs after winning only 3 of last 6 matches. The whole world must be crapping hard in ODIs.

Interesting that the rankings are only calculated from the last 6 games though, eh?

[grecian]

Kieswetter suffered really from KP and Bell's needs. Like Howe said, he was really only picked to bat in the middle order because he was already in the team, and they obviously didn't, and still don't, fully trust Buttler or Bairstow's keeping.

I thought he suffered from being average as opener, hence why KP and Bell were played there, and now he's suffering from being average down the order.

[Cabinet96]

Meh. Post World Cup he averaged 32 at a Strike Rate of over 100 as opener, which was far better than Ian Bell's record was when he was recalled. He batted with Cook ahead of him and Trott below him, so being able to strike at over a run a ball was invaluable. Against Sri Lanka in the 2011 summer, we won everyone time he scored 40, and lost in the two games he didn't.

If we were really expecting out wicketkeeper to do more than average in the 30's and strike at a run a ball, winning us nearly every game he did well in at the process, then we were expecting too much IMO.

[grecian]

Meh. Post World Cup he averaged 32 at a Strike Rate of over 100 as opener, which was far better than Ian Bell's record was when he was recalled. He batted with Cook ahead of him and Trott below him, so being able to strike at over a run a ball was invaluable. Against Sri Lanka in the 2011 summer, we won everyone time he scored 40, and lost in the two games he didn't.

If we were really expecting out wicketkeeper to do more than average in the 30's and strike at a run a ball, winning us nearly every game he did well in at the process, then we were expecting too much IMO.

We can expect our openers to do that though, can't we, it's a key position?

[Cabinet96]

We can expect our openers to do that though, can't we, it's a key position?

Yeah maybe. But I'd argue that Kieswetter is more obviously limited to opening than someone like Pietersen or Bell. And with Cook and Trott at 1 and 3, I thought at the time that it would have been better to have someone like Kiesy opening instead of Bell, who had only been striking at 70 in his previous times as opener.

[grecian]

Yeah maybe. But I'd argue that Kieswetter is more obviously limited to opening than someone like Pietersen or Bell. And with Cook and Trott at 1 and 3, I thought at the time that it would have been better to have someone like Kiesy opening instead of Bell, who had only been striking at 70 in his previous times as opener.

Well, only in that one series against the Lankans really. We have to look to improve. KP should open for me, he scores quick and can get big scores. Bell has done shockingly well there though.

[GingerFurball]

Yeah maybe. But I'd argue that Kieswetter is more obviously limited to opening than someone like Pietersen or Bell. And with Cook and Trott at 1 and 3, I thought at the time that it would have been better to have someone like Kiesy opening instead of Bell, who had only been striking at 70 in his previous times as opener.

Cook's not exactly a slow scorer in ODI cricket though.

[Cabinet96]

Cook's not exactly a slow scorer in ODI cricket though.

Maybe not, but in matches like this Kieswetter was really invaluable IMO. I know it wasn't a full 50 over game, but when chasing big totals, Kieswetter could always score faster than Cook or Trott.

While Cook's innings there was awesome, it was still below the required rate, and he wouldn't have been able to bat through at that pace had Kieswetter not exploded.

[marc71178]

Meh. Post World Cup he averaged 32 at a Strike Rate of over 100 as opener, which was far better than Ian Bell's record was when he was recalled. He batted with Cook ahead of him and Trott below him, so being able to strike at over a run a ball was invaluable. .

However his inability to rotate the strike is a disaster when batting between those 2.

[L Trumper]

However his inability to rotate the strike is a disaster when batting between those 2.

Yeah! This is always has been his biggest problem. It will work if he is batting with KP and Lumb in T20. But I am not sure how he can get away without rotating strike in ODIs.