Cricket Betting Site Betway
Page 3 of 65 FirstFirst 123451353 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 969
Like Tree216Likes

Thread: England players and selection discussion thread

  1. #31
    International 12th Man
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Rochdale
    Posts
    1,671
    Quote Originally Posted by grecian View Post
    Honestly I think conversion rate for Root is a slight problem, but just to judge players on it, is nonsensical, to be utterly simplistic I think I'd much prefer 2 99s, then a 100 and 0. What averages are you using there?

    Kohli in Tests clearly not on thesame level as Kane or Joe yet would be a better way of putting it, if you want to be melodramatic about levels. Yet in reality they could all go either way.
    Erm, no he's no. Can we please kill this idea that Kohli is even close to Root and Williamson, let alone Smith at the minute? Since the start of 2014 (after Root's sketchy start where he managed 955 runs @ 36.75 in just over a year) Root's scored 3920 runs @ 60.30, and Williamson 3322 @ 66.44 (Smith 4281 @ 72.81), whilst Kohli has only managed 2990 @ 52.45, about as good Warner, Younis and McCullum in that time period. Ontop of this Root and Williamson have only once barely blipped below a 50 average for a calendar year during this point (last year with 49.23 and 47.06 respectively), whilst Kholi has had 2 full years averaging sub 45, and is currently in his 3rd season sub 45. Ontop of this Kohli has only had the one year at a 60+ average, whereas Root and Williamson have had 2, and are currently in their 3 year of 60+ average. Now granted a lot can still change this year and we are still talking about the start of all these players careers, but from evidence so far Kohli has shown nothing to say that he can keep scoring runs at the monstrous rates that Root, Williamson and Smith have all shown, and if you're to ask me who looks like they won't smash the 10k run barrier (when they all should), it'll be Kohli, and I think he'll be alongside Cook and Jayawardene in the sub 50 average range in the 10k runs club.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bijed View Post
    Thing to note here is incredible as his run of form was, he proceeded to turn into an absolute walking wicket. Obviously I'm not saying he's going to be a tailender from here on in, but it does make it a bit difficult to accurately assess him right now. Fair to say he's had the best golden run but also the worst of the low points of the Big 4?
    He's not even had the best golden run ffs. His best run he averaged 75.93, all 3 of the other have had years at a higher average, Smith @ 81.85, Williamson @ 90.15, Root @ 97.12, whilst Smith has also had 3 back to back years scoring at an average higher than 70 (2014, 2015, 2016, and could still yet finish 2016 at 70+).
    Last edited by Groundking; 23-07-2017 at 03:40 PM.

  2. #32
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend honestbharani's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    24,003
    Quote Originally Posted by Groundking View Post
    Erm, no he's no. Can we please kill this idea that Kohli is even close to Root and Williamson, let alone Smith at the minute? Since the start of 2014 (after Root's sketchy start where he managed 955 runs @ 36.75 in just over a year) Root's scored 3920 runs @ 60.30, and Williamson 3322 @ 66.44 (Smith 4281 @ 72.81), whilst Kohli has only managed 2990 @ 52.45, about as good Warner, Younis and McCullum in that time period. Ontop of this Root and Williamson have only once barely blipped below a 50 average for a calendar year during this point (last year with 49.23 and 47.06 respectively), whilst Kholi has had 2 full years averaging sub 45, and is currently in his 3rd season sub 45. Ontop of this Kohli has only had the one year at a 60+ average, whereas Root and Williamson have had 2, and are currently in their 3 year of 60+ average. Now granted a lot can still change this year and we are still talking about the start of all these players careers, but from evidence so far Kohli has shown nothing to say that he can keep scoring runs at the monstrous rates that Root, Williamson and Smith have all shown, and if you're to ask me who looks like they won't smash the 10k run barrier (when they all should), it'll be Kohli, and I think he'll be alongside Cook and Jayawardene in the sub 50 average range in the 10k runs club.



    He's not even had the best golden run ffs. His best run he averaged 75.93, all 3 of the other have had years at a higher average, Smith @ 81.85, Williamson @ 90.15, Root @ 97.12, whilst Smith has also had 3 back to back years scoring at an average higher than 70 (2014, 2015, 2016, and could still yet finish 2016 at 70+).

    Yeah if you remove the worst periods of a couple of the top 4 they do end up above Kohli, shocking, isn't it? Also, wasn't this period the time India had spin friendly tracks at home which apparently means all wickets that Ashwin and Jadeja took were bogus? So apparently that does not apply when Kohli bats?


    I am not saying Kohli as good as the others in the big 4 but lets not pretend there is this huge chasm either. This topic has been done to death and as I said before, the biggest chasm is between The Chump and KW... This is how I would rate them.


    Smith >>> KW > Root >> Kohli.
    vcs likes this.
    We miss you, Fardin. :(. RIP.
    Quote Originally Posted by vic_orthdox View Post
    In the end, I think it's so utterly, incomprehensibly boring. There is so much context behind each innings of cricket that dissecting statistics into these small samples is just worthless. No-one has ever been faced with the same situation in which they come out to bat as someone else. Ever.
    A cricket supporter forever

    Member of CW Red and AAAS - Appreciating only the best.


    Check out this awesome e-fed:

    PWE Efed

  3. #33
    Global Moderator Prince EWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Cribbertopia
    Posts
    56,771
    I think it's more important than England settle on exactly what they want their eleventh player to do than it is to decide on which fringe batsmen end up selected, honestly.

    With just ten players England can select their best seven batsmen, an above average #8, a competent wicket keeper, their best three seamers, their best spinner, and have a fully functional five man attack. The eleventh man - Dawson - is adding very little presently, and I don't even think he's the best man for the job if what they want is a spinner-who-can-bat. It's a nice problem to have but it's still a real problem, and they risk either over-extending some of their best players or wasting them in bit-part roles while inferior "specialists" squander good opportunities.
    zorax, Justo and honestbharani like this.
    Rejecting 'analysis by checklist' and 'skill absolutism' since Dec '09
    'Stats' is not a synonym for 'Career Test Averages'


    Quote Originally Posted by Jeffrey Tucker
    Someone asked me the other day if I believe in conspiracies. Well, sure. Here's one. It is called the political system. It is nothing if not a giant conspiracy to rob, trick and subjugate the population.
    Before replying to TJB, always remember:
    Quote Originally Posted by TheJediBrah View Post
    Next week I'll probably be arguing the opposite

  4. #34
    International Coach mr_mister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    australia
    Posts
    13,475
    ive just been playing a season as Hampshire in ICC17 and my god this James Adams bloke just scores runs for fun. He's averaged 70 for me this season after the first 8 FC games


    PICK HIM ENGLAND
    TheJediBrah likes this.
    cricket rules brah


  5. #35
    International Coach mr_mister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    australia
    Posts
    13,475
    also regarding Lara, that 99 series against us(when he was around 55 tests and only had 10 tons) was very important for him. I won't say make or break because he was never getting dropped but like, it was the moment where we'd see if he was to go on and be a legend or just a wonder kid who never matched up to his early exploits

    3 very famous and unique tons in 3 matches told the tale. A double ton, that famous rearguard unbeaten 150 to win a match from nowhere and then smashed 100 in 70 balls

  6. #36
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend zorax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    22,912
    Quote Originally Posted by Prince EWS View Post
    I think it's more important than England settle on exactly what they want their eleventh player to do than it is to decide on which fringe batsmen end up selected, honestly.

    With just ten players England can select their best seven batsmen, an above average #8, a competent wicket keeper, their best three seamers, their best spinner, and have a fully functional five man attack. The eleventh man - Dawson - is adding very little presently, and I don't even think he's the best man for the job if what they want is a spinner-who-can-bat. It's a nice problem to have but it's still a real problem, and they risk either over-extending some of their best players or wasting them in bit-part roles while inferior "specialists" squander good opportunities.
    England has the perfect squad to play a specialist wicketkeeper who bats at 10 or something.

    Would add most value to them too IMO.
    Check out The Cricket Web Podcast!

    The Cricket Web Podcast #33 - I Just Wanna Talk About Vernon Philander

    iTunes
    SoundCloud

    Quote Originally Posted by Prince EWS View Post
    If only Kane Richardson had played some HK domestic cricket before his ODI debut.
    Quote Originally Posted by S.Kennedy View Post
    The Hong Kong Blitz is better than the IPL.

  7. #37
    vcs
    vcs is online now
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend vcs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    India
    Posts
    23,283
    Quote Originally Posted by honestbharani View Post
    Yeah if you remove the worst periods of a couple of the top 4 they do end up above Kohli, shocking, isn't it? Also, wasn't this period the time India had spin friendly tracks at home which apparently means all wickets that Ashwin and Jadeja took were bogus? So apparently that does not apply when Kohli bats?


    I am not saying Kohli as good as the others in the big 4 but lets not pretend there is this huge chasm either. This topic has been done to death and as I said before, the biggest chasm is between The Chump and KW... This is how I would rate them.


    Smith >>> KW > Root >> Kohli.
    Yeah, this one has been done to death.

    For me, I will still put Kohli alongside the other two, and a little behind Smith, don't care what the numbers say. He passes the eye-test. Hope he proves me right.
    mr_mister and honestbharani like this.
    Quote Originally Posted by benchmark00 View Post
    Chix love a man with a checkered posting history.

  8. #38
    Hall of Fame Member TheJediBrah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    15,237
    England need to sort their team balance out, then decide who the best players are to fit it. Having Stokes, Moeen and Bairstow who are both among the best 5-6 batsmen in the country and genuine all-rounders is confusing the **** out of their selectors IMO, and leading to them making ridiculous selections like a specialist 6th bowler.

  9. #39
    International Vice-Captain S.Kennedy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    4,569
    Quote Originally Posted by zorax View Post
    England has the perfect squad to play a specialist wicketkeeper who bats at 10 or something.

    Would add most value to them too IMO.
    Does one even exist? The two rivals for Bairstow's gloves are Ben Foakes of 40ish average and Jos 'T20' Butler. Butler averages 30ish but that is just because he is too stupid to plays first-class cricket. Foakes you would still want to play as a vaguely specialist batsman - a six as he plays at Surrey.

    I suppose you could have Butler+ at 8 (or possibly 9 if you think he is shitter than Liam Dawson!).
    mr_mister likes this.
    "It's (The 100) optimised short-form cricket
    Tom Harrison
    What we are doing here is future-proofing county cricket
    Tom Harrison.
    We want to make the game as simple as possible for them (mums and kids) to understand
    Andrew Strauss.

  10. #40
    International Vice-Captain S.Kennedy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    4,569
    Quote Originally Posted by TheJediBrah View Post
    England need to sort their team balance out, then decide who the best players are to fit it. Having Stokes, Moeen and Bairstow who are both among the best 5-6 batsmen in the country and genuine all-rounders is confusing the **** out of their selectors IMO, and leading to them making ridiculous selections like a specialist 6th bowler.
    I think really what is confusing them is Ali. They tried to make him a spinner-who-bats to solve England's spin crisis (he insists he is a batsman first and domestically a 3 or 4!) so initially had him at 7 or 8. They then realised he was a batsman-who-bowls so moved him up the order into various batting positions. Now they have reverted to playing him back at 7!

  11. #41
    Cricket Web: All-Time Legend zorax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    22,912
    Quote Originally Posted by S.Kennedy View Post
    I think really what is confusing them is Ali. They tried to make him a spinner-who-bats to solve England's spin crisis (he insists he is a batsman first and domestically a 3 or 4!) so initially had him at 7 or 8. They then realised he was a batsman-who-bowls so moved him up the order into various batting positions. Now they have reverted to playing him back at 7!
    What's confusing with Ali is that he is legit the best spin option England have
    honestbharani likes this.

  12. #42
    International Coach mr_mister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    australia
    Posts
    13,475
    How about Bairstow-Stokes-Ali at 6-7-8(and you can rotate them when ones in batting better form they can have the 6 spot). You've got 5 bowlers,a keeper and now you can have a top 5 of specialist bats and odds are one will hang around with Root for a good partnership eventually


    Pollock-Boucher-Klusener were used in this way sucessfully for a while right?
    Last edited by mr_mister; 23-07-2017 at 11:44 PM.

  13. #43
    Global Moderator Prince EWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Cribbertopia
    Posts
    56,771
    Quote Originally Posted by mr_mister View Post
    How about Bairstow-Stokes-Ali at 7-8-9(and you can rotate them when ones in better form they can have the 7 spot) to partner Broad(who is a number 10 these days anyway) and Anderson and then voilia. You've got 5 bowlers,a keeper and now you can have a top 6 of specialist bats and odds are one will hang around with Root for a good partnership eventually


    Pollock-Boucher-Klusener were used in this way sucessfully for a while right?
    That's only four bowlers. If you made 6-7-8 and included Woakes at 9 then that'd be five, and it's been suggested (and, in fact, tried, by England). EDIT: I see you've edited your post to reflect this now; all good.

    The problem with this is that the batsmen up the order aren't as good as these guys, and it could leave at one of them seriously wasted while scrubs shunt it higher up. Of course there are problems with *not* doing that too - you either end up wasting the bowling or keeping of one of those players instead, or you end up burning them out, or you end up with a specialist batsman at #8 which seems like a waste of a spot entirely, or you pick Dawson who really is a waste of a spot entirely.

    There's no "how about X and then voila" solution - there are problems with literally everything they could do with this. They need to basically do a cost/benefit analysis and decide which one of them has the least problems.
    Last edited by Prince EWS; 23-07-2017 at 11:58 PM.

  14. #44
    International Debutant Bijed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    12,472
    Posts
    2,527
    Quote Originally Posted by Prince EWS View Post
    or you pick Dawson who really is a waste of a ​post entirely.
    Hey, he's not so bad that it makes posting about him on here a waste of time
    Follow me @cricket_gc, should you want to learn more of my cricketing thoughts and opinions, or read them in more detail on my blog: https://gccricket.wordpress.com

  15. #45
    Hall of Fame Member TheJediBrah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    15,237
    Quote Originally Posted by mr_mister View Post
    How about Bairstow-Stokes-Ali at 6-7-8(and you can rotate them when ones in batting better form they can have the 6 spot). You've got 5 bowlers,a keeper and now you can have a top 5 of specialist bats and odds are one will hang around with Root for a good partnership eventually


    Pollock-Boucher-Klusener were used in this way sucessfully for a while right?
    Do England even have any other decent specialist bats other than Cook and Root though? It seems as though everyone they try turns ****

    SA had plenty of batsman who were better than Pollock/Boucher/Klusener (throw Boje in there too and you had some pretty strong tails)

Page 3 of 65 FirstFirst 123451353 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. England Test Selection Thread - Winter 2016
    By broadyfan94 in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 63
    Last Post: 28-08-2016, 06:55 AM
  2. Players to watch out for & Selection Highlights
    By Daemon in forum 2012 ICC World Twenty20 - Sri Lanka
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 21-09-2012, 11:31 PM
  3. *Official* England Squad discussion thread
    By Furball in forum 2010 ICC World Twenty20 - West Indies
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 03-05-2010, 07:35 PM
  4. England Selection Appreciation Thread
    By jackster83 in forum Ashes 2009
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 25-08-2009, 08:07 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
  •