***Official*** India and England in Australia ODI Tri-Series 2015

[Contra]

I'm not against his growth as a cricketer, I'm just saying that if you want to see him improve its probably better you let him be rather than get at him all the time, I would imagine it would be quite annoying for a player to get praised by his mates for a freak innings and then get talked down after playing a "stupid shot" the next innings. I mean maybe its the Australian approach/Lehmans approach to be hard headed about it, if he feels that's the best way to get him to improve then fair enough, I just hope it doesn't have the opposite affect and just kill his joy for the game. Pakistan tried to do with Afridi his whole career (to no avail) what Australia are now trying with Maxwell, maybe it will work out for them I guess lol.

 

[Prince EWS]

I'm not against his growth as a cricketer, I'm just saying that if you want to see him improve its probably better you let him be rather than get at him all the time, I would imagine it would be quite annoying for a player to get praised by his mates for a freak innings and then get talked down after playing a "stupid shot" the next innings. I mean maybe its the Australian approach/Lehmans approach to be hard headed about it, if he feels that's the best way to get him to improve then fair enough, I just hope it doesn't have the opposite affect and just kill his joy for the game. Pakistan tried to do with Afridi his whole career (to no avail) what Australia are now trying with Maxwell, maybe it will work out for them I guess lol.

Australia successfully did it with Symonds. They just let him know what was expected of him and kept picking him until he did it. Symonds wasn't quite as aggressive as Maxwell but then again Maxwell isn't quite as aggressive as Afridi.

 

[Contra]

Australia successfully did it with Symonds. They just let him know what was expected of him and kept picking him until he did it. Symonds wasn't quite as aggressive as Maxwell but then again Maxwell isn't quite as aggressive as Afridi.

I suppose, but I feel that Maxwell is much more in the Afridi league than he is in Symonds league, I haven't followed Symonds early career but I don't think he was ever a "go from ball one" type of player. So its easier to accept someone who tries to play himself in and then try to go for shots than someone who just goes from ball one. I guess we'll just have to wait and see how Maxwell turns out, serious potential there if he can maximize it then it'd be a great bonus for Australia.

 

[SteveNZ]

I'm not against his growth as a cricketer, I'm just saying that if you want to see him improve its probably better you let him be rather than get at him all the time, I would imagine it would be quite annoying for a player to get praised by his mates for a freak innings and then get talked down after playing a "stupid shot" the next innings. I mean maybe its the Australian approach/Lehmans approach to be hard headed about it, if he feels that's the best way to get him to improve then fair enough, I just hope it doesn't have the opposite affect and just kill his joy for the game. Pakistan tried to do with Afridi his whole career (to no avail) what Australia are now trying with Maxwell, maybe it will work out for them I guess lol.

Definitely hear what you're saying - I just don't think there's enough freak innings to justify what he's doing when it goes bad. I haven't followed his career as closely as others, but there's not been a lot of match-winners or blitzkriegs like yesterday has there?

I think Maxwell's been pretty up-front about the fact he wants to improve and be a more dependable option. Not a rock or anything he can't/won't be,

For the record, I think he's harshly treated. He didn't want the 'big show' tag, he's gone about batting in a way that has worked at times but he's not experienced enough to know when it works and when it doesn't yet. He seems to actually really value playing for Australia when others getting the cash he has in the IPL might pay it lip service. He's easy fodder for social media nipsies, and who cares about those heroes. The infamous leave came at a real unfortunate time for him in the Big Bash - it wasn't like his side were 0-3 (3-0 for you Aussie viewers) and he tried to hoick it to the moon. He just made an error. I reckon he's a good cat who has all the skills but could do with ironing out a few creases.

 

[vic_orthdox]

I suppose, but I feel that Maxwell is much more in the Afridi league than he is in Symonds league, I haven't followed Symonds early career but I don't think he was ever a "go from ball one" type of player. So its easier to accept someone who tries to play himself in and then try to go for shots than someone who just goes from ball one. I guess we'll just have to wait and see how Maxwell turns out, serious potential there if he can maximize it then it'd be a great bonus for Australia.

Symonds had the same role before the 2003 WC innings; spent a lot of time at 7 (either him or Ian Harvey) and would get elevated to go nuts in the last six or so overs.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Symonds was looked at as a hack before that insane knock he played against Pakistan in the 2003 WC. I certainly think Maxwell is capable of being just as good tbh.

 

[Adders]

The thing is it's not about his aggression, I don't see anyone having a pop at Marsh or Faulkner.

Maxwells innings last night from the power play on was on a whole other level of ridiculousness. I've got to be honest I've never seen that much of Afridi and what I have has never impressed me at all.......I would hope someone as gifted as Maxwell would be setting his sights a lot higher than emulating him.

He was trying to smash every ball into another post code last night. No thought process or respect for a good delivery (not that there were too many tbf) every shot was a flay of that big bat and he either connected or missed the ball by a foot. I'll say again he got lucky last night and it could have just as easily ended with him out on 60-70 odd (can't recall what he was on when the power play started) and leaving 15 overs for new batsmen to negotiate.

Up to then he played a great innings and sure it was the right time to up the ante, but I can't say I've ever seen the other big hitters mentioned swatting flies for half the deliveries faced when they're teeing off.

I think Glenn Maxwell is an immensely gifted cricketer and he could be achieving so much more at international level than he is currently delivering. His average and conversion rate are ****e and I believe he is a better player than that............but he will not amount to anything until he can play with at least some smarts.

And I don't buy for a second the "that's how he plays, put up with it or drop him" bollocks either. Up until the 35th over last night he played a responsible innings (still with reverse sweeps and ramp shots etc) and helped dig Australia out of the ****. I also watched every ball of the 130 odd off 90 balls he made for the PM's 11..........that was a great innings where he picked the balls to go after.

 

[Antihippy]

Maxwell is not an afridi type at all. Pretty different batting styles honestly.

I honestly think it's just about his process. Even if I keep saying that his batting is dumb I didn't mean that his batting is actually dumb, he just tries to do too much really. Marsh and faulkner are your conventional power-hitters who wait for balls that they can muscle over the in-field or the rope (though they are pretty good at finding gaps too), but I feel that Maxwell is more comfortable trying to pick the gaps (even though he's honestly just as good of a power hitter as the rest of them). Some of the ways he uses his wrists to create the angle for a slice drive is pretty insane, and as much as people hate his reverse sweeps I think that he uses them really well to manipulate the fields. It's not as if he treats it like a slog either. He can either go over the top, keep it down or use it like a deft touch like the shot he played to get to 50. That powerplay might seem dumb but it was mostly trying to get the ball to the off-side where there are less out-fielders so going over the top is going to be less of a risk to him, even though the shots he plays looks really low-percentage.

Problem is that when he gets in the mood to do that for every ball, it means he's not playing the balls on their merit. I agree that it's a somewhat hit or miss approach but when it comes off it comes off well, and hopefully one day he'll mature his game enough to know how to do it with less risks. For now I'm happy if his role can be either someone who can build a solid base and then go berserk, or someone who is sent in to go berserk after the team had built a solid base already.

 

[JBMAC]

OOPS

On the subject of Maxwell;

Maxwell fires into world's top 20 batsmen | cricket.com.au

 

[SteveNZ]

OOPS

On the subject of Maxwell;

Maxwell fires into world's top 20 batsmen | cricket.com.au

I find the ranking system really weird. How can a guy who averaged 25 in 2014, and this is his first decent knock in 2015, be 17th? Mahela has scored a 94 and a ton in his last half dozen knocks, scored 846 runs at 32 last year and is 21st. Anyone explain the logic? Maxwell's ODI record is very average, yet he's well ahead of the likes of Bell, Warner, du Plessis, McCullum, Smith etc.

 

[GotSpin]

Nothing more annoying than when a players poor shot in a horribly mistimed situation is excused because 'its just the way he plays'. Same in Tests as well.

 

[cnerd123]

Nothing more annoying than when a players poor shot in a horribly mistimed situation is excused because 'its just the way he plays'. Same in Tests as well.

Nah it's a valid argument. Some batsman find attacking shot to be lower risk than nudging and blocking. It's playing your natural game vs trying something you don't feel comfortable with. But us as fans tend have this mentality that getting out nicking a straight ball while trying to block it is more acceptable than getting out trying to hit that same delivery out of the park, even if for that particular batsman the former option holds more risk than the latter.

Many batsmen may appear to play what appears to be a brainless shot in pressure situations, but that's just them resorting to doing what they know best and feel most comfortable with instead of playing in a way that doesn't come naturally to them. The latter creates more risk and doubt in their mindset and often won't be the best option. And very often these same batsmen can win you games by playing the way they play.

 

[GotSpin]

My problem is With batsmen who fail to take into consideration the match situation and bat in a bubble and then criticism is just waved aside With the saying 'oh thats just the way he bats'. Be it from attack, defend or to consolidation.

Its bull****. A good batsman is Able to change gears according to how the match dictates. That includes guys like Chanderpaul to Warner.

Seriously annoys me when a guy plunders the bowlers early on in his innings but fails to kick on for his team due to a thoughtless shot.

And if these guys ****ing cant block a few balls...dont let them bat in the top order.

 

[cnerd123]

My problem is With batsmen who fail to take into consideration the match situation and bat in a bubble and then criticism is just waved aside With the saying 'oh thats just the way he bats'. Be it from attack, defend or to consolidation.

Its bull****. A good batsman is Able to change gears according to how the match dictates. That includes guys like Chanderpaul to Warner.

Seriously annoys me when a guy plunders the bowlers early on in his innings but fails to kick on for his team due to a thoughtless shot.

And if these guys ****ing cant block a few balls...dont let them bat in the top order.

Yea well no one is saying Maxwell is good, and Maxwell didn't put himself in the top order.

Just saying stop giving him so much **** for trying to do the best he can.

 

[GotSpin]

I am speaking generally by the way.

 

[Contra]

Symonds had the same role before the 2003 WC innings; spent a lot of time at 7 (either him or Ian Harvey) and would get elevated to go nuts in the last six or so overs.

Yeah but see asking someone to play a role and the approach of a particular individual are two different things, Symonds was asked to hit towards the back end (most players batting low down the order will be asked to hit out in any case). The question is, if Symonds was given the opportunity to bat higher up would he still attack from ball one? With Maxwell its his own style of play rather than him being asked to "go nuts". Maxwell currently doesn't have the game yet to properly build an innings, hopefully he can get that right over time, But as it stands Maxwell's temperament and approach are more like Afridi in the sense that regardless of the situation and batting order he will go for it more often then not.

 

[viriya]

I find the ranking system really weird. How can a guy who averaged 25 in 2014, and this is his first decent knock in 2015, be 17th? Mahela has scored a 94 and a ton in his last half dozen knocks, scored 846 runs at 32 last year and is 21st. Anyone explain the logic? Maxwell's ODI record is very average, yet he's well ahead of the likes of Bell, Warner, du Plessis, McCullum, Smith etc.

uh um.. i know of a better rating system that still ranks him #55.. +17 places from that knock though.. also an ATG all-round performance (#57).

just saying.

 

[SteveNZ]

uh um.. i know of a better rating system that still ranks him #55.. +17 places from that knock though.. also an ATG all-round performance (#57).

just saying.

If you care to explain the other, misguided situation to me...I'll slap a bookmark on said other rating system right away.Otherwise it'll continue to bug me and I won't be able to fathom looking at any cricket-based information.

 

[wiff]

I am not a fan of Maxwell but his innings the other day did sort of win the match for Australia. Kudos.

 

[SteveNZ]

Yea well no one is saying Maxwell is good, and Maxwell didn't put himself in the top order.

Just saying stop giving him so much **** for trying to do the best he can.

Cmon mate. If we weren't allowed to discuss the merits of anyone who tries their best, we'd only have threads on the West Indies and Ravi Bopara.

If Brendon McCullum continued to live by the 'it's the way I bat' theory, he wouldn't have a triple century and some doubles to go with it. GotSpin is right, a good batsman is match and situationally aware. If you're not, you're not a good batsman - you're just effective on your day.