Howe_zat
Audio File
I think, if I'm being generous as possible, there's something to be said against having a batting order that plays every ball on its merits, because if you play like that against a good attack then the runs will dry up completely. There are times when proactive players are more likely to get the runs because they are being proactive, not necessarily because they're better.Not sure why they continue to bring up this "turgid" top order thing. When England were at their best, we had Strauss, Cook and Trott at the top, they were hardly forcing the pace. In Test cricket I couldn't give a **** if they bat slightly slowly at the top so long as they're scoring runs. I'd take a bloke that bats slowly and averages 50, than some T20 slogger that gets a score away every now and then and averages <40.
Sri Lanka's dropping of Kulasekara is looking a worse decision by the over.
It's true though, that more often than not, complaints about 'turgid' batting are more examples of people confusing what they'd like to see with what England should do. And there's the ever-present people who think that the scoring rate is solely down to the approach of the batsmen.
Last edited: