James Hopeless

[Xuhaib]

Isn't he similiar to those bit n pieces English ODI all rounders that were in abundance during the 90's.

So why do Aus keep on persisting with him, is he seen as a potential like Watto who is bound to come good eventually or simply there is lack of good options for Australia currently.

 

[Matt79]

Ha, thought you were having a crack at CW's James, thought maybe you had an exam coming up.

He's not hopeless, he often does a good job with bat and ball for the team. He's not the most flashy player, but he'll do his job more times than not.

Any basis for saying otherwise other than one poor match against SA?

That said, he clearly not in our best XI - but is a quite able replacement/depth player that most teams would be happy to be able to call upon if required.

 

[Uppercut]

His record's not the worst in the world. He's one of those with "**** every time i'm watching syndrome" for me.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

He's not that bad but I don't particularly rate him either.

If Watson was fit, there'd be a strong case for dropping him. As it is there's not a lot of options to fill that spot unless he gets dropped for an actual bowler (Hauritz) and Australia look to Clarke/Hussey to bowl 10 between them.

 

[Xuhaib]

21 with the bat and 34 with the ball is hardly setting the world and he is also not one of those impact players like Afridi who could somewhat justify their place despite the poor record.

 

[inbox24]

I guess he is doing a role at the moment which Hopefully Shane Wotton wrapped in cotton will eventually take over.

Still think he's a bits and pieces player, the love child of the selector's dire acceptance of mediocrity since the big guns retired. Sure there will be a lull in the quality of players, but there's no need to pick middle of the road players, you still have to pick the best.

 

[Manee]

He's alright, tbh, but placing emphasis on his bowling and almost giving him an obligation to bowl 10 overs per innings does him no good as conditions are often so that he is inoccuous with the ball. If he were to play more as a full fledged all rounder, something that might not be possible in the current Australian setup, then I'm sure he would shine more.

 

[Xuhaib]

He's alright, tbh, but placing emphasis on his bowling and almost giving him an obligation to bowl 10 overs per innings does him no good as conditions are often so that he is inoccuous with the ball. If he were to play more as a full fledged all rounder, something that might not be possible in the current Australian setup, then I'm sure he would shine more.

Yup I believe he is a 5th bowler at best and would like to see him opening the batting instead of Hussy, Hussy is so valuable down the order.

 

[pup11]

I think Hopes is a very underrated player of the current Aussie ODI side, he has been bowling his ten overs quite well in most of the conditions and he can also prove to be a wicket-taking option in helpful conditions, batting wise i don't think one can blame him for his inconsistent showing, someday' he is asked to open the batting, someday' he pushed down to no.8, now that sort of thing never helps a batsman.

He is definitely not a very highly talented cricketer, but he makes most of whatever talent he has and adds flexibilty to the side, i think he is not "hopeless", its just that Australia needs to define his role in the team better.

 

[Something_Fishy]

James Hopes is the Australian Vernon Philander. (A bit better in the field, but both are crap)

 

[Matt79]

21 with the bat and 34 with the ball is hardly setting the world and he is also not one of those impact players like Afridi who could somewhat justify their place despite the poor record.

tbh, would take him 100 times out of 100 over Afridi.

 

[Xuhaib]

tbh, would take him 100 times out of 100 over Afridi.

Afridi these days will always give you better value with the ball then Hopes and despite a mediocre record Afridi is still striking and averaging higher with the bat.

 

[chaminda_00]

Servicable, but still Hopeless.

Though he is better then the other bits and pieces all rounder Australia has played in the past like Harvey, Shane Lee, Moody (back end of his career) and BJ

 

[Uppercut]

I think his bowling is a good example of how you can get away with poor bowling in ODIs but not T20s. What use is his bowling? It's neither fast enough to be threatening nor accurate enough to be containing. In ODI middle overs it doesn't matter much where you bowl, you'll just go for a lot of singles. In T20s nothing-bowling gets smashed.

 

[Xuhaib]

Servicable, but still Hopeless.

Though he is better then the other bits and pieces all rounder Australia has played in the past like Harvey, Shane Lee, Moody (back end of his career) and BJ

Harvey and Moody were quite decent from what I remember son't know their career stats so I might be wrong here.

 

[pup11]

JR Hopes, One-Day Internationals - Bowling analysis


I think these stats show how well Hopes has done since his comeback in India, he has been very good with the ball in the middle overs, he has been miserly with his economy rate and has bowled good number of overs without giving away too many runs away, he has also proved to be a handy partnership breaker, imo he has done more than enough to qualify as the 5th bowler, and if his batting is utilised properly he might prove to more handy with the bat too.

 

[chaminda_00]

I think his bowling is a good example of how you can get away with poor bowling in ODIs but not T20s. What use is his bowling? It's neither fast enough to be threatening nor accurate enough to be containing. In ODI middle overs it doesn't matter much where you bowl, you'll just go for a lot of singles. In T20s nothing-bowling gets smashed.

He is a better T20 bowler then ODI bowler...

 

[Uppercut]

He is a better T20 bowler then ODI bowler...

Don't agree. He's done okay in the T20 internationals. Not brilliantly, but okay. His record's shocking in domestic T20.

 

[chaminda_00]

Don't agree. He's done okay in the T20 internationals. Not brilliantly, but okay. His record's shocking in domestic T20.

Has more to do with when he bowls in domestic Twenty20 matches. He bowls at the front and back end of domestic games when batsmen are looking to tonk. Whereas in T20I he bowls in middle, where he more effective due to his changes.

His used poorly at domestic level, due to lack of options. But he is a better T20 bowler when used right in matches.

 

[iamdavid]

I think he's a very similar player to Ian Harvey actually, both in his quality and the role he's being asked to fill. Slightly better batsman and slightly inferior bowler to Harvey yet very similar.

I never thought he'd set the world on fire but he is capable of doing a job...his bowling is generally tidy if a little inoccuous...and his batting has it's flaws ie can't play spin to save himself and can tend to get carried away and play one big shot too many, however I can still see him contributing with the bat at ODI level, he's more likely to succeed opening than anywhere else but it's just a question of whether thats in the teams best interests.

His selection has largely been justified due to his great OD record for Queensland and some good performances at good times for Australia A, yet I'm still not sure whether he has a role to play longterm, obviously depends largely on whether Watson can get fit or how quickly Henriques can develop.