• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

*Official* 2nd Test at Lord's

91Jmay

International Coach
Hales at 3, would give us someone also technically poor but if he goes off he can win a game in a session which Ballance can't. We don't really have many options I like, I don't like Compton.
 

91Jmay

International Coach
No, it isn't. It's like asking a bloke who opens or bats at 3 and is averaging over 50 this season to do it.
 

Antihippy

International Debutant
I'm talking about the reasons you stated. Technically poor (well, for tests) but if he goes off he can win the game in a session? You need stability at the top.
 

vic_orthdox

Global Moderator
Hales with the ball swinging back into him from Johnson & Starc doesn't fill me with much confidence. Probably the exact wrong sort of stuff for him to face, IMO.
 

Pothas

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
No, it isn't. It's like asking a bloke who opens or bats at 3 and is averaging over 50 this season to do it.
He is not averaging 50 anymore. He had a really good start to the season (mainly smashing Hampshire) but not done a great deal of late. I can understand the appeal of Hales but there is really nothing in first class record, or even in his ODI performances that suggest he would be a success.
 

Gob

International Coach
Dunno why people make such a big deal about smith's technique its perfectly fine for ffs. Yeah he shuffles a lot but the position that he ends up at the point of facing the ball is not far off from likes of Kallis and Amla. It looks exaggerated cos he starts way outside the leg but its just irrelevant. Plus he has such soft hands,doesn't push at the ball and plays under the eye with a straight bat. Perfectly fine for me
 

91Jmay

International Coach
You keep forgetting that Smith is brilliant though. Root's glorious technique made the sum total of **** all in this test match.
Who mentioned Root? Smith is brilliant but we don't need Hales to be the best batsmen in the world we need him to be a serviceable 3 which his technique should allow.
 

harsh.ag

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Dunno why people make such a big deal about smith's technique its perfectly fine for ffs. Yeah he shuffles a lot but the position that he ends up at the point of facing the ball is not far off from likes of Kallis and Amla. It looks exaggerated cos he starts way outside the leg but its just irrelevant. Plus he has such soft hands,doesn't push at the ball and plays under the eye with a straight bat. Perfectly fine for me
Major candidate to fall away with deterioration of eye, like Ponting. But until then, he is god, again just like Ponting.
 

Cabinet96

Hall of Fame Member
Hales at 3? notsureifsrs
yeah Hales will be a rubbish no.3.
He's done a lot better over the last couple of seasons. I don't think he'd make any runs but given he was talked about when he couldn't even get in the Notts FC and OD sides a couple of years ago it's not really a surprise to see him get mentions at the moment. If you were to ask the Sky punditry team who could come in as opener I'd guess most would suggest Hales.
 

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Yeah but he isn't Glenn Maxwell, and if Smiths technique can make runs at 3 then Hales can.
Who mentioned Root? Smith is brilliant but we don't need Hales to be the best batsmen in the world we need him to be a serviceable 3 which his technique should allow.
You wouldn't sound so dumb if you didn't post about things you know **** all about (ie. cricket)
 

Top