Batting at 3

[Bahseph]

This really isn't a black and white topic. I find the Smith/Khawaja example above to be a very good one. You have to factor in the a whole host of factors when deciding who is your number 3.

As a Saffer, Kallis batted 3 when we didn't have anyone better to do the job. When Amla came along he moved one down and it benefited everyone involved. But in both those instances he was our premier batsman.

 

[Zinzan]

1) Best batsman should bat where he feels most comfortable
2) Implies batsmen must have more confidence to bat at 3 than lower which is a faulty premise imo
3) No
4) No

This is where I differ, The best batsman should bat where it's best for the team he/she plays for. In most instances, it probably is a case of batting where they feel most comfortable, but in a situation like England's right now, where their openers are struggling and they have a weak number 3, with a decent number of middle order options, I'm not so sure it's just about wherever Joe feels most comfortable.

Team> best player.

 

[Starfighter]

Hide below people, eh?
Best batsman should face the first ball then; after all, that's the hardest time, and we wouldn't want him hiding behind somebody else, would we?

This is more or less how much logic is behind the 'should bat at three' argument. People always talk about taking responsibility for the innings or facing the newer ball after an opener's failed or something. In that case, why not just open? And then cue some claptrap with respect to the relative tiredness of the bowlers or pressure or something.

Any batsman is best batting where they score the most runs, as far as they can accommodated in the order.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

For 2-3 years NZ had its best test batsman batting at number 8

 

[Fuller Pilch]

Anyway, openers are often the best batsmen in teams

 

[Zinzan]

I often used to think Ponting would have averaged 2-3 more had he batted at 4

 

[Burgey]

Would have averaged 6-10 more if he’d retired three years earlier tbh

 

[srbhkshk]

Yeah, kind of think that if the best batsman should bat at 3 has merit, logically the best batsman opening should be even better.

 

[S.Kennedy]

I think, as has been noted, the primacy of three is a traditional Australian thing and has been since Bradman.

That is what Atherton was on about discussing the Root thing awhile back. He said Australians traditionally place their best batsmen at three whereas the English put their best batsmen at four.

 

[Spark]

That is what Atherton was on about discussing the Root thing awhile back. He said Australians traditionally place their best batsmen at three whereas the English put their best batsmen at four.

That does make a bit of sense given the general tempo and structure of cricket in both countries tbf. In Australia you want to dominate and post a big score first up, in England you want to not get shot out by the new rock.

 

[Rasimione]

This really isn't a black and white topic. I find the Smith/Khawaja example above to be a very good one. You have to factor in the a whole host of factors when deciding who is your number 3.

As a Saffer, Kallis batted 3 when we didn't have anyone better to do the job. When Amla came along he moved one down and it benefited everyone involved. But in both those instances he was our premier batsman.

Spot on. It seems to be the Australian way to want the best batsmen to bat at 3. I'm not sold on the idea.

 

[SeamUp]

This really isn't a black and white topic. I find the Smith/Khawaja example above to be a very good one. You have to factor in the a whole host of factors when deciding who is your number 3.

As a Saffer, Kallis batted 3 when we didn't have anyone better to do the job. When Amla came along he moved one down and it benefited everyone involved. But in both those instances he was our premier batsman.

Definitely. Team dynamics is never black and white. So many things to consider.

We've been lucky in that Kallis was so technically good he could make the #3 his so young with Cullinan playing his strokes at 4.
What Amla matured into was so vital to what a good side we were for so long. It allowed Kallis to bat 4 which gave him the extra rest after bowling (considering he still got it through at 35/36) and he played with more freedom in the last 4/5 years of his career.
That is why now Amla/AB 3/4 could be massive for us in these couple of years and why I respect Faf as a leader and team-man. He knew he shouldn't be batting 3/4 and put himself to 5 when he got the captaincy.