***Official*** Australia in Sri Lanka

[Prince EWS]

What do people think of having two very attacking openers over one attacking and one more defensive player (e.g. Hughes/Warner vs Watson/Katich)?

Couldn't care less as long as they both score runs tbh.

 

[Ruckus]

Hmm...I think it allows for a more natural style of play if one of the openers is more defensive. If you have two very attacking openers, I think there is a tendency for a partnership where one of the openers feels they need to be more defensive (against their natural style of play) so as to allow the other to lead the attack so to speak. Might be somewhat of an illusion though when it actually comes down to it, not really sure.

 

[Andre]

Reckon the best balanced opening pairs aren't always based on scoring rates, but more strengths of the players.

For example, I've always liked the balance of a front foot player with a back foot player at the top of the order (think Hayden/Langer) as it makes the bowlers have to bowl 2 different lengths to the batsmen and opens up scoring opportunities.

 

[adub]

Opening pair criteria:

No. 1 - amount of runs scored
No. 2 - daylight.

 

[Ruckus]

Opening pair criteria:

No. 1 - amount of runs scored
No. 2 - daylight.

Yeah but if there are factors which make an opening pair more likely to succeed (e.g. Andre's good point), then that's gonna affect criteria 1.

 

[adub]

Yeah but if there are factors which make an opening pair more likely to succeed (e.g. Andre's good point), then that's gonna affect criteria 1.

I don't believe the guy at the other end makes that big a difference. The good bats score runs no matter who is at the other end. Good batsmen adjust their game to the conditions - what the bowlers are doing, what the pitch is doing, the light, field placements, and who their partner is. I think it's a pretty long bow to say we can't open with player A and player B because they are both very similar in they way they play but score more runs than any other openers we have available. Choose the batsmen who consistently score more heavily than the other options and everything else will take care of itself.

 

[Spark]

Reckon the best balanced opening pairs aren't always based on scoring rates, but more strengths of the players.

For example, I've always liked the balance of a front foot player with a back foot player at the top of the order (think Hayden/Langer) as it makes the bowlers have to bowl 2 different lengths to the batsmen and opens up scoring opportunities.

Strauss/Cook have done OK, and they're pretty similar players. With adub on this - the overwhelming philosophy should just be to pick the best two openers in the country.

 

[Ruckus]

I don't believe the guy at the other end makes that big a difference. The good bats score runs no matter who is at the other end. Good batsmen adjust their game to the conditions - what the bowlers are doing, what the pitch is doing, the light, field placements, and who their partner is. I think it's a pretty long bow to say we can't open with player A and player B because they are both very similar in they way they play but score more runs than any other openers we have available. Choose the batsmen who consistently score more heavily than the other options and everything else will take care of itself.

Oh yeah, of course, I was more alluding to questions of the batting order - e.g. perhaps if Warner was is the team it would be better to have him playing further down the order and have Watson opening with Hughes (for whatever reason etc. etc). In a few years we could have a top 6 with as many as 5 potential openers (Warner, Khawaja, Hughes, Maddinson, Watson), and they might all do well opening. So I think you'd have to start looking at things beyond just how they are as individual batsmen, and work out who would make the most balanced opening pair (as well as, obviously, taking into account who would be best suited for each batting position).

 

[adub]

Oh yeah, of course, I was more alluding to questions of the batting order - e.g. perhaps if Warner was is the team it would be better to have him playing further down the order and have Watson opening with Hughes (for whatever reason etc. etc). In a few years we could have a top 6 with as many as 5 potential openers (Warner, Khawaja, Hughes, Maddinson, Watson), and they might all do well opening. So I think you'd have to start looking at things beyond just how they are as individual batsmen, and work out who would make the most balanced opening pair (as well as, obviously, taking into account who would be best suited for each batting position).

Fair enough. It will be an interesting proposition were that particular group of players all find themselves in the test side (and it's not that fanciful an idea). I have a simple solution to that one though - go with what the NSW selectors go with. (I know that's a bit of a cop out, but hey).

 

[Top_Cat]

Strauss/Cook have done OK, and they're pretty similar players. With adub on this - the overwhelming philosophy should just be to pick the best two openers in the country.

Would disagree with that in terms of how you'd approach bowling at them. Would definitely be looking to bowl fuller to Cook than Strauss. Their arcs differ with full balls coming back in (Strauss is mid-wicket to fine-leg, Cook is more mid-on to mid-wicket) and one is definitely more likely to pull or hook than the other. Yeah they're both strong on the cut but at that level, everyone is and it's **** bowling to put it there anyway (looking at you Hilf).

With Andre as usual (no homo),

 

[Arachnodouche]

The difference between a sub continental dust bowl and an overtly green pitch is the uneven bounce. Sharp spin can still be negotiated by nimble footwork and supple wrists but a ball scraping the shins takes away any pretence of an even trade off between ball and bat. The Galle pitch was indeed unfit to play Test match cricket on; when the top starts sliding off over the first four hours of play, that is an abomination.

Good forum, this.

 

[benchmark00]

The difference between a sub continental dust bowl and an overtly green pitch is the uneven bounce. Sharp spin can still be negotiated by nimble footwork and supple wrists but a ball scraping the shins takes away any pretence of an even trade off between ball and bat. The Galle pitch was indeed unfit to play Test match cricket on; when the top starts sliding off over the first four hours of play, that is an abomination.

Good forum, this.

Peter Roebuck?

 

[Arachnodouche]

Another thing that I argue over with friends, and I'm sure this will raise hackles among the locals on the forum, is making doctored pitches to salvage some misplaced sense of pride. How does a Kanpur or a Mumbai '04 make a ****whit of a difference when we get our asses humped to kingdom come on tours like the current spectacle in England? Wouldn't hurt to man up and take it on the chin instead of retaining some vague notion of respect. Make bouncy, seaming pitches the norm or at least the dominant variety across the land. At least it'll usher in a culture trying for excellence abroad instead of the "frog in a well" tunnel vision that we have right now.

Azhar's India won everything at home for nigh on ten years but to what end? Who in their right heads seriously considers those teams?

 

[Spark]

The difference between a sub continental dust bowl and an overtly green pitch is the uneven bounce. Sharp spin can still be negotiated by nimble footwork and supple wrists but a ball scraping the shins takes away any pretence of an even trade off between ball and bat. The Galle pitch was indeed unfit to play Test match cricket on; when the top starts sliding off over the first four hours of play, that is an abomination.

Good forum, this.

Haha lively start. Welcome to the forum.

---

Filter's there for a reason, mind. Just type it out normally.

 

[Xuhaib]

thought the Guyana pitch for the Pak-Wi test was worse I saw the game just on the first day and it never looked unfit to play you knew that batting would get tougher as the game progresses but was far off from being too dangerous to play.

 

[Spark]

I don't think anyone was suggesting this pitch was remotely dangerous tbh.

E: I know the players probably hate it but back-to-back Tests are great.

 

[Top_Cat]

Eagerly awaiting Arachnodouche's avatar choice. Username and first couple of posts have got him off to a flyer!

 

[benchmark00]

He's the injection of life the forum needed since the banning of blaze18.

 

[Spark]

Adub needs an avatar as well, tbh.

 

[Top_Cat]

Shocked it's not this, tbh.