***Official*** England in West Indies 2015

[Cabinet96]

It is when it's debatable that either is in the best 7 bats in the country.

I understand with where the England side is at the moment that Stokes can't fit in to the batting order; just don't try and do it at 8.

So do you think it's preferable he doesn't play if there's only room for him at 8? Sounds like Tredwell is an injury doubt for the 2nd test, so a straight swap of him for Moeen sounds most sensible. But what is the batting order for that?

 

[Prince EWS]

I'd bat Buttler at 8 tbh. At full strength I think I'd bring Woakes in for Stokes and bat him at 8 though.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Sanga and KP currently batting for Surrey. Would be so fun to watch.

 

[Cabinet96]

I really ought to head down to the Oval more this season.

 

[Dan]

Stokes has to bat at 6 if he's in the team. Give him the number 8 "you're effectively a bowling all-rounder" role and he's going to piss around and get out with really **** shots. Force him to take some responsibility by batting him at 6, and I think you're better utilising your batting resources.

Moeen and Buttler may be marginally worse if you push them to 7/8 compared to them being at 6/7, but Stokes at 8 is likely to be incredibly ****, as he has been every time he's batted there in the past. Overall, if you're picking all 3, you get the best gain overall by batting Stokes at 6 IMO.

 

[Cabinet96]

I hope he bats six next test. Just so we can really test the theory that if you bat him in the top six he's the cricketing equivalent of Cristiano Ronaldo.

 

[grecian]

Buttler scores so quickly, he can bat at 8, as long as they don't use a ****ing nightwatchman, which they always do, grrr.

 

[cnerd123]

Stokes has to bat at 6 if he's in the team. Give him the number 8 "you're effectively a bowling all-rounder" role and he's going to piss around and get out with really **** shots. Force him to take some responsibility by batting him at 6, and I think you're better utilising your batting resources.

I hate this argument

When you are playing a Test match, being paid big money and representing your country, doing the thing you trained your whole life for, you bat responsibly and make the most of your ability no matter where in the lineup you are. Heck being at 11 is no excuse to piss around. If that's his attitude he shouldn't be playing Tests to begin with.

Tell Stokes to suck it up and bat properly at 8 and score some runs to prove that he is worthy of being in the top 6 IMO.

I mean really; do you think someone like Ponting or Dravid went "oh I should be at 3, but they have put me all the way down at 6 so I am going to piss around till they move me up there to best utilise my talents." Such bull****.

 

[cnerd123]

Same for Broad too btw. If he's scared of the ball then send him down to 11 where he belongs and tell him he can bat higher once he stops backing away every delivery.

 

[Spark]

I hate this argument

When you are playing a Test match, being paid big money and representing your country, doing the thing you trained your whole life for, you bat responsibly and make the most of your ability no matter where in the lineup you are. Heck being at 11 is no excuse to piss around. If that's his attitude he shouldn't be playing Tests to begin with.

Tell Stokes to suck it up and bat properly at 8 and score some runs to prove that he is worthy of being in the top 6 IMO.

I mean really; do you think someone like Ponting or Dravid went "oh I should be at 3, but they have put me all the way down at 6 so I am going to piss around till they move me up there to best utilise my talents." Such bull****.

There's a massive difference between a top order batsman batting 6 and batting 8, come on. It's just trying to fulfill some pointless, ill-conceived macho "prove yourself the hard way" philosophy that helps neither the team nor the player.

 

[OverratedSanity]

There's a massive difference between a top order batsman batting 6 and batting 8, come on. It's just trying to fulfill some pointless, ill-conceived macho "prove yourself the hard way" philosophy that helps neither the team nor the player.

Nah ***** has a point. No.8 is hardly a position that indicates you're a tail ender anyway. He definitely shouldn't be that low but using that as an excuse by saying he doesn't give a **** about his batting is silly. Guys like Vettori and Imran have batted at 8 and made that position mean something for their teams.

 

[grecian]

Nah ***** has a point. No.8 is hardly a position that indicates you're a tail ender anyway. He definitely shouldn't be that low but using that as an excuse by saying he doesn't give a **** about his batting is silly. Guys like Vettori and Imran have batted at 8 and made that position mean something for their teams.

Yeah, I'm 50/50 on this, he should man-up a bit, but OTOH it works him batting at 6, so maybe just do that then. Who cares Gregory will be in to replace him soon so it won't matter.

 

[Flem274*]

batting 8 is different to 6. 8s need to be able to manage the tail from ball one for a start.

 

[Pothas]

Yeah I would probably bat Buttler at 8 if he Stokes and Moeen are in the side. Moving Stokes down to 8 when he batted pretty well but did not take any wickets would seem a little strange. Really though Stokes needs to be the 4th best pace bowler available to be worthy of his spot and he isn't really.

 

[Cabinet96]

We've been through this before tbh. You'd generally expect someone batting at 6 instead of 8 to bat more responsibility and get more runs overall. But people have gone overboard about its effects in the case of Stokes, pretty much because of a handful of innings.

 

[Furball]

batting 8 is different to 6. 8s need to be able to manage the tail from ball one for a start.

No they don't as he comes to the crease with either the wicketkeeper or the last recognised batsman at the other end.

 

[Furball]

He made a century in the first dig though.

Not relevant. His dismissal in the 2nd innings was completely unacceptable.

 

[grecian]

Not relevant. His dismissal in the 2nd innings was completely unacceptable.

So speaks one of KPs biggest fans.

Without Blackwood they'd have lost easily one silly shot shouldn't really distract from that.

 

[cnerd123]

Its okay if you want to argue that Stokes doesn't have the skills needed from a number 8, but to say that he shouldn't bat 8 -and that the entire English batting order should rejig itself to fit him in at 6- just because he cant give a **** when he bats at 8 is a piss poor excuse.

Especially from a team that has made a villain of of KP for having an ego. Now you want to send Moeen and Butler -both more proven Test batsmen- to 7/8 because Stokes finds it beneathe him to bat at 8? How is that in any way consistent?

Just keep him out of the side until he's ready to play for the team and not just his prIde IMO.

And FWIW batting at 8 can't possibly be harder than batting at 6; if anything its easier so trying to argue that Stokes isn't cut out for it because he can't farm the strike or whatever is so silly. If you aren't good enugh to bat at 8 in Tests then you are definitely not good enough for 6.

I mean what's next, arguing Broad should open the batting because batting at 9 doesn't incentivise him to get over his fear of the ball? Maybe Jimmy will be the next Bradman if he only had the added responsibility of batting at 3?

 

[Pothas]

I do sometimes wonder how good a batsman Broad would have become if England had put him at 6 or 7 way back at the start of his test career.