• 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** Ireland in England 2019

Pothas

Hall of Fame Member
It kinda does, in some circumstances. Has been the basis of what success we've had in the last few years.

Not much we can do about having no top order options.
Yeah it has generally worked at home when you 300 is often good score and you have Anderson. Plus people like Moeen and Woakes are genuinely good batsmen in England.
 

Flem274*

123/5
wouldnt broad v woakes be academic anyway when in the ashes you can field

deck
chairs
titanic
root
buttler
stokes
bairstow
moeen
woakes
broad
anderson

with archer first reserve?
 

BSM

U19 Debutant
Na I think Archer has to play. It's not as if his theoretical inclusion is based solely on his ODI performances. It's arguably in FC cricket where he has had the most statistical success, I can see the argument that Anderson, Broad and Woakes is a proven recipe for destruction in English conditions but I think Archer is too big of a talent to ignore. Australian batsmen have historically dealt better with the pure swing bowlers than the asian sides that have toured recently so I think Archer's pace and seam movement will be vital in the series.
 

TheJediBrah

Hall of Fame Member
wouldnt broad v woakes be academic anyway when in the ashes you can field

deck
chairs
titanic
root
buttler
stokes
bairstow
moeen
woakes
broad
anderson

with archer first reserve?
I feel like they'd go an extra bowler instead of one of your indomitable top 3
 

wpdavid

International Coach
It kinda does, in some circumstances. Has been the basis of what success we've had in the last few years.

Not much we can do about having no top order options.
No there isn't. But I feel it's even more of a problem post-Cook, even though AC wasn't a run machine towards the end of his test career. Some combination from Roy, Burns, Sibley, Denly and Jennings vs Starc and Cummins looks like a recipe for 10 for 3 as often as not. I remember when pinch hitters became a thing in ODIs all those years ago, and we almost need to find a couple of pinch blockers to try and see off the new ball before our middle order get cracking. Maybe, anyway.
 

Test_Fan_Only

State Regular
You may want to check out our top 6 in the 1977/78 tours of Pakistan and NZ. Post Packer defections but pre-Gower.
You make very good point. A top 6 of Boycott, Brearley, Rose, Randall, Roope, Miller is very weak, although the top 6 that played against New Zealand of Boycott, Randall, Radley, Roope, Gatting, Botham is a lot stronger
 

Cabinet96

Global Moderator
Yeah it has generally worked at home when you 300 is often good score and you have Anderson. Plus people like Moeen and Woakes are genuinely good batsmen in England.
Yeah one of the biggest factors in our different home/away results is that all our #7s #8s are good for multiple significant scores across an English summer, while they're pretty much #9s in a lot of away conditions. That said if Starc and Cummins are are able to bowl at their top pace Australia are probably one of the few sides that could genuinely make our lower order redundant on a lot of occasions.
 

BSM

U19 Debutant
Bairstow's 100 in SL was very good. As was his 50 at 3 Vs WI. Worth a punt at 3.
Problem is that Bairstow doesn't want to bat at 3 (and definitely wouldn't open). He likes the safety of batting 5 to 7 and keeping too much to potentially give up the gloves and move to 3 where he has constant pressure to score runs. Can't blame him too much but it's frustrating that he seemed decent at no.3 but doesn't want to do it.
 

Howe_zat

Request Your Custom Title Now!
No there isn't. But I feel it's even more of a problem post-Cook, even though AC wasn't a run machine towards the end of his test career. Some combination from Roy, Burns, Sibley, Denly and Jennings vs Starc and Cummins looks like a recipe for 10 for 3 as often as not. I remember when pinch hitters became a thing in ODIs all those years ago, and we almost need to find a couple of pinch blockers to try and see off the new ball before our middle order get cracking. Maybe, anyway.
If we were to deploy a blockwatchman of some description then I'd pick Woakes for it. Has better classical batting than half our top order.

It's a fun idea if a bit too overthinky for me to get behind it
 

Bijed

International Debutant
Problem is that Bairstow doesn't want to bat at 3 (and definitely wouldn't open). He likes the safety of batting 5 to 7 and keeping too much to potentially give up the gloves and move to 3 where he has constant pressure to score runs. Can't blame him too much but it's frustrating that he seemed decent at no.3 but doesn't want to do it.
I think the technique Bairstow has developed to help make him successful at ODIs has made him considerably more vulnerable to swing bowling, so I wouldn't want to see him batting there in a home series. Still worth a try on future tours of the subcontinent though, imo
 

Flem274*

123/5
i was originally going to post i had thought along the same lines as trundler and tough titties if he doesn't want to bat #3, he'll bat where he's told.

but then i thought about his technique a bit more and yeah he's got a bit of an open gate. anyone who brings the ball back into him will give him sleepless nights if he bats in the top 3, and you'd still need to find a competent middle order batsman to replace him.

if someone is ready to go (has poor old ollie pope scored some runs since his brutal sudden elevation and dropping?) then it could be worth a try but otherwise maybe better to keep the middle order strong. it feels a bit like the calls for kane to open or ross to bat #3 (pre-kane) that have occurred over the years.

i think england are suffering a bit from never being satisfied with a semi-adequate player as a stop gap. i didn't think malan, hameed, carberry, compton et al were bad players. they had a bit there to work with. too late now though. or maybe not, you do have 18 teams...
 

Test_Fan_Only

State Regular
Interesting comments about Bairstow's technique getting worse because of one day cricket. He averaged 41.62 with Cook as captain, but only 31.15 with Root as captain. That is a massive decline in his batting.
 

Starfighter

International Coach
Interesting comments about Bairstow's technique getting worse because of one day cricket. He averaged 41.62 with Cook as captain, but only 31.15 with Root as captain. That is a massive decline in his batting.
The other argument is that he only ever had one good year in tests (2016 where he averaged 59 against a next best of 34 in 2017). Must say his technique looks worse than it used to in tests.
 

Groundking

State Captain
The other argument is that he only ever had one good year in tests (2016 where he averaged 59 against a next best of 34 in 2017). Must say his technique looks worse than it used to in tests.
He had a nice purple patch where Gillespie sorted his technique out, but since then it's just regressed again, like everybody has under Bayliss.
 

Test_Fan_Only

State Regular
The other argument is that he only ever had one good year in tests (2016 where he averaged 59 against a next best of 34 in 2017). Must say his technique looks worse than it used to in tests.
I did not look at that, very interesting. Either way it clearly shows he has the talent to be a good test match batsman but whatever the reason, his inability to maintain a good technique has made him a much worse batsman.
 

Top