• 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.

*Official* Road to the 2025-26 Ashes

Nintendo

Nintendo

Cricketer Of The Year
Moving green back down the order now would also be extremely stupid for so many different reasons. They made him bat 3 after preparing by batting 5/6 in div 2 county cricket because they thought he could bat there long term and he showed he wasn't ready for that in the WTC final. He actually showed some promise there at the back half of the WI series. None of the alternatives for #3 inspire much confidence, and dropping Green just after he's found some confidence at 3 would be extremely reductive and backwards. Webster has also had a very impressive start to his test career. Two home summer's ago we where find with green at 4, marsh at 6 with them sharing the 5th bowler duties. Why do we suddenly need green batting 6 as the main 5th bowler when he's just coming back to bowling after a major surgery?

Let's run down the pro's of green #3, Webster #6 vs alternative #3, Green #6
Green #3, Webster #6
1.Webster has not put a foot wrong so far
2.Green has started to show promise at 3 after some initial struggles
3.The alternative #3's don't inspire much more confidence and aren't clearly better bat's then Green at FC level
4.Prior evidence suggests that green batting top order and bowling a bit + extra pace bowling allrounder at #6 can work

#3 alternative, Green #6, drop webster
1.??????/
 
Gob

Gob

International Coach
Nintendo said:
Moving green back down the order now would also be extremely stupid for so many different reasons. They made him bat 3 after preparing by batting 5/6 in div 2 county cricket because they thought he could bat there long term and he showed he wasn't ready for that in the WTC final. He actually showed some promise there at the back half of the WI series. None of the alternatives for #3 inspire much confidence, and dropping Green just after he's found some confidence at 3 would be extremely reductive and backwards. Webster has also had a very impressive start to his test career. Two home summer's ago we where find with green at 4, marsh at 6 with them sharing the 5th bowler duties. Why do we suddenly need green batting 6 as the main 5th bowler when he's just coming back to bowling after a major surgery?

Let's run down the pro's of green #3, Webster #6 vs alternative #3, Green #6
Green #3, Webster #6
1.Webster has not put a foot wrong so far
2.Green has started to show promise at 3 after some initial struggles
3.The alternative #3's don't inspire much more confidence and aren't clearly better bat's then Green at FC level
4.Prior evidence suggests that green batting top order and bowling a bit + extra pace bowling allrounder at #6 can work

#3 alternative, Green #6, drop webster
1.??????/
Click to expand...
Best batting lineup to start is the one that played the wtc final
 
GoodAreasShane

GoodAreasShane

Cricketer Of The Year
I am very much of the opinion that BJ was a better cricketer than he sometimes gets credit for, as a couple of his gun Shield final performances indicate

But as a commentator he really gives the impression of a man who hasn't played the game at any serious level at all. Looks slick and presentable but really offers zero worthwhile analysis whatsoever
 
Jarquis

Jarquis

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
the big bambino said:
I'd be surprised and I'm guessing so would most, including the press. There'd be no good reason to drop Webster after all the runs he's scored on mambas. I think there would be uproar if that happened that would lead to speculation the selectors are not doing their job with consequent questions as to why they shouldn't be replaced.
Click to expand...
Saw something on twitter that so far 20 of 20 media pundits have named a First Ashes Text XI without big Beau
 
cascade

cascade

U19 12th Man
20 people not worth listening to then. Not only because they've excluded Beau, but because they think it's a good idea to try pick an XI in August.
 
andruid

andruid

International Coach
Molehill said:
I thought Broad had Wood rather than Carse. And his 11 is surely the most likely if everyone is fit too.
Click to expand...
I am still running my Wood-Potts-Stone agenda. They should be squirrelled away in a secret fitness camp before being unleashed on day one of the Ashes.
 
ImpatientLime

ImpatientLime

International Regular
andruid said:
I am still running my Wood-Potts-Stone agenda. They should be squirrelled away in a secret fitness camp before being unleashed on day one of the Ashes.
Click to expand...
jeez

its the 21st november, australia have won the toss and elected to bat on the first day of the ashes. its 32 degrees and glorious sunshine. australia are 50-0 after 15 overs and england are two men down after both wood and stone have hobbled off the pitch.

i like olly stone a lot but he should forget red ball and focus on the bat up and catch leagues.
 
Molehill

Molehill

International Coach
RightArmMystery said:
Yeah you're right actually, not sure what I saw, but yeah he said an attack of Wood, Archer, Atkinson, Bashir, Stokes, which minus Bashir I can get behind.
Click to expand...
We may as well pick a spinner as long as Stokes is fit to bowl, not sure really who else is a better option. He wasn't actually that bad against India and out bowled Jadeja.

ImpatientLime said:
jeez

its the 21st november, australia have won the toss and elected to bat on the first day of the ashes. its 32 degrees and glorious sunshine. australia are 50-0 after 15 overs and england are two men down after both wood and stone have hobbled off the pitch.
Click to expand...
Not entirely convinced this is a selection based on merit.....
 
ImpatientLime

ImpatientLime

International Regular
Molehill said:
We may as well pick a spinner as long as Stokes is fit to bowl, not sure really who else is a better option. He wasn't actually that bad against India and out bowled Jadeja.



Not entirely convinced this is a selection based on merit.....
Click to expand...
merit left the room re english test match selection a couple of years ago
 
RightArmMystery

RightArmMystery

State Regular
Molehill said:
We may as well pick a spinner as long as Stokes is fit to bowl, not sure really who else is a better option. He wasn't actually that bad against India and out bowled Jadeja.
Click to expand...
On paper maybe, did you watch him bowl? He's ****ing awful. No control, all but 2 of his wickets were caught on the boundary, and one of those was Siraj. He'll get absolutely slaughtered in Australia, especially coming in off the back of zero cricket seeing as he's injured.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top