Cricket Player Manager
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 18
Like Tree1Likes

Thread: Should Trott bat at number two for England?

  1. #1
    Cricket Spectator theredbull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    6

    Should Trott bat at number two for England?

    Don't think England have sorted this out since Strauss...

    Anyone agree, Pietersen at 3, Bell 4, then etc etc..

    Thoughts?

  2. #2
    International Coach flibbertyjibber's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Mrs Miggins pie shop
    Posts
    11,944
    No

  3. #3
    International Captain Maximas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Footmarks
    Posts
    6,455
    ^
    RIP Phillip Hughes (1988-2014)

  4. #4
    Cricket Spectator theredbull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    6
    You think Root has the experience not to let them down under pressure?
    Once you're out, you're out.


  5. #5
    International Captain Maximas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Footmarks
    Posts
    6,455
    yeah Root looks good, played well for 30 before getting a good bowl that was unexpected, then was unlucky to be strangled down the legside. Pieterson at 3 is probably the more worrying thing if Trott moves up

  6. #6
    Cricket Spectator theredbull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    6
    Yep, you got a point there.

    Pietersen gives the side balance at 4, however I think England might be under pressure from an Australian side with nothing to loose in this series.

    Bell would probably show up better at 4, extra responsibility. Maybe that would reign in Pietersen too @ 3 ??

    I'm not suggesting Root is not good enough, or should even be out the side btw.

  7. #7
    International Regular NasserFan207's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Essex
    Posts
    3,885
    Root is actually an opener. They should stick with him IMO, he's not suited for the lower order.
    Batsman I tolerate: V. Richards, S. Tendulkar, E. Morgan, N. Hussain. KEVIN O F******* BRIEN

  8. #8
    Englishman BoyBrumby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Gone too soon
    Posts
    45,340
    Think he opened once on tour. Maybe Bangladesh?

    Trott at #3 is one of our strengths tho and I hate losing one of those to paper over a perceived weakness elsewhere. It's a matter of record Pietersen (for whatever unearthy reason) doesn't like going in at first drop and Bell at three is just packed full of faily goodness, so it's a no-brainer.
    Cricket Web's 2013/14 Premier League Tipping Champion

    - As featured in The Independent.

    "I don't believe a word of Pietersen's book, but then I don't believe a word anyone else has said either."
    - Simon Barnes renders further comment on KP's autobiography superfluous in a sentence

  9. #9
    Cricket Spectator theredbull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    6
    I would not imagine he would be good down the order either, therefore, he HAS to play at 2. This may be a weakness in the England side for this ashes series, if he doesn't deliver.

  10. #10
    Cricket Spectator theredbull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    6
    Trott is well suited to 3 but not sure Root has the experience in this situation. Time will tell in his next few innings.You are correct Boybrumby, it's a no brainer and that may be the issue....

  11. #11
    International Regular harsh.ag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    India
    Posts
    3,074
    Although I think Trott should stay at number 3, this is part of a larger point about how players are bracketed at a certain number. Do we really want to think that George Headley, Rahul Dravid or Sachin Tendulkar would not have done phenomenally well at the opening position? Viv and Lara did their best at number 3, even though Lara preferred 5. Dravid was anyways a de-facto opener for India for a long time, just like Headley was for the Windies back in the day. What do you guys think?
    ~ Do you think I care for you so little that betraying me would make a difference ~

  12. #12
    International Vice-Captain kyear2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    w.i
    Posts
    4,250
    Quote Originally Posted by harsh.skm View Post
    Although I think Trott should stay at number 3, this is part of a larger point about how players are bracketed at a certain number. Do we really want to think that George Headley, Rahul Dravid or Sachin Tendulkar would not have done phenomenally well at the opening position? Viv and Lara did their best at number 3, even though Lara preferred 5. Dravid was anyways a de-facto opener for India for a long time, just like Headley was for the Windies back in the day. What do you guys think?
    First of all it almost seems like a culture thing, where in England the best batsmen open, while everywhere else the best batsmen seemed to gravitate to the middle order. That aside, there is no reason to belive that Dravid or Headley in particular wouldn't have been brilliant as openers and they often filled that role anyway and there is more pressure for the number three coming in early that the openers batting with no wicket lost.
    theredbull likes this.
    Aus. XI
    Simpson^ | Hayden | Bradman | Chappell^ | Ponting | Border* | Gilchrist+ | Davidson3 | Warne4^ | Lillee1 | McGrath2


    W.I. XI
    Greenidge | Hunte | Richards^ | Headley* | Lara^ | Sobers5^ | Walcott+ | Marshall1 | Ambrose2 | Holding3 | Garner4

    S.A. XI
    Richards^ | Smith*^ | Amla | Pollock | Kallis5^ | Nourse | Cameron+ | Procter3 | Steyn1 | Tayfield4 | Donald2

    Eng. XI
    Hobbs | Hutton*^ | Hammond^ | Compton | Barrington | Botham5^ | Knott | Trueman1 | Laker4 | Larwood2 | Barnes3

  13. #13
    Cricket Spectator theredbull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    6
    I agree with the above kyear2, especially about Tendulka, he could have batted anywhere. England do have a weakness here. Without experience, Root will struggle against an under-rated Australian team who will get him cheaply. The middle order of England have always been prone to a nervous collapses. Pietersen is seen as the balance for the side but without opening runs both he and Trott will perform in prescribed heady manner. Pressure is more keenly felt when a side is favorite. Therefore, my opening point remains, it is not about the runs for England here but the wickets lost at the start of the innings, without superiority in batting being established. Trott could provide that by staying in for long periods, frustrating the Australian bowlers. Root probably won't. Under pressure the cracks are showing in the top order, especially in the second innings today.
    Last edited by theredbull; 11-07-2013 at 08:51 PM.

  14. #14
    Hall of Fame Member Howe_zat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Top floor, bottom buzzer
    Posts
    16,703
    Haha. You said 'number two'

  15. #15
    Cricket Web Staff Member fredfertang's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    It is a far far better place ............ etc etc
    Posts
    12,351
    If Trott wanted to open I'm sure he would have been moved up when Strauss retired, and however attractive an idea it might seem to be if the bloke doesn't want the job there's no point asking him to do it - square pegs/round holes et al

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Trott or Not
    By ganeshran in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 25-10-2011, 07:24 AM
  2. Ten reasons why England will be world number one!
    By Sir Alex in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 08-08-2010, 05:16 AM
  3. Replies: 44
    Last Post: 13-12-2009, 11:00 PM
  4. How much can England lose by - and still be number two?
    By Samuel_Vimes in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 26-11-2006, 07:37 AM
  5. England's all time Number 1 one-dayer
    By Lillian Thomson in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 13-06-2006, 10:17 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •