*Official* 3rd Test at Edgbaston

[91Jmay]

Especially as Bairstow hasn't made this weight of runs before, even though his domestic form is normally good.

 

[Tangles]

Sounds like his technique hasn't changed based on those Dizzy quotes. Playing across the line on slow low pitches against this bowling attack sounds like a bad idea to me.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Far too much weighting being given to "form" here imo. Someone needs to dig Pickup's post about it from years ago.

English cricket have an immediate important goal right now: winning back the Ashes. It's not a your of Bangladesh or something where selecting a young, promising player with good potential technique etc is the most important factor. Picking someone in form makes sense right now, even if it is against Johnson, Starc etc

 

[hendrix]

English cricket have an immediate important goal right now: winning back the Ashes. It's not a your of Bangladesh or something where selecting a young, promising player with good potential technique etc is the most important factor. Picking someone in form makes sense right now, even if it is against Johnson, Starc etc

As far as I'm aware, we've never had a conclusive argument that form is anything other than a randomly clumped group of good scores; i.e., it does not exist.

So even if you want to pick the guys most likely to win the next test, I still think you do that based on who your best batsman is. In my opinion, James Taylor is significantly better than Bairstow.

 

[TheJediBrah]

As far as I'm aware, we've never had a conclusive argument that form is anything other than a randomly clumped group of good scores; i.e., it does not exist.

So even if you want to pick the guys most likely to win the next test, I still think you do that based on who your best batsman is. In my opinion, James Taylor is significantly better than Bairstow.

I could not disagree with this more. Both from personal experience and from a viewing perspective.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Is there any way to calculate how much Smith needs to score to breach that legendary 961 barrier in the ICC peak ratings? Would be incredible if he managed it.

 

[Bahnz]

Is there any way to calculate how much Smith needs to score to breach that legendary 961 barrier in the ICC peak ratings? Would be incredible if he managed it.

Given that Don Bradman averaged around 150 during his mid-30's peak, and Steve Smith has been averaging about 90 of the last 18 months, I'm guessing it'll take something utterly ridiculous to make happen.

 

[Antihippy]

Steve Smith to break Brian Lara's highest first class score record.

 

[Malleeboy]

I think Ponting at 942 (Hobbs is 942 as well) is a more realistic target or even Hutton at 945. Smith is a real chance of being No2 on ICC points system...
Purely on ICC ranking he would make the Australian side ATG ICC points side.


3 Bradman 961, 4 Ponting 942 , 5 Smith 936

Hayden 935 as one opener, Gilchrist at 874 as keeper at 7

Leaves only one opener and 6 open.
6 would be between Hussey 921, Walters 922, Harvey 921 but of course many would opt for Miller (681 batting, 862 bowling) at 6 to give a genuine all rounder.
Openers is Warner at 880 and Lawry 871 but you could crib a little and make Hussey the opener.

Can't help but feel that the number of games played at a higher frequency has warped ICC point system significantly, as a player in amazing forum can rack up many more tests in that period.
As good as Smith is, it is hard to perceive him as the 10th best of all time.....

 

[hendrix]

I could not disagree with this more. Both from personal experience and from a viewing perspective.

Not sure what your personal experience or viewing perspective does to change the fact that no one has ever put forward a proper argument to prove that form is anything other than a clump of good scores that, by chance, happen to be grouped together.

The point being, if you're going to select a batsman, surely it shouldn't be based on a concept that's about as well proven as the tooth fairy. Just select the best batsman.

 

[Burgey]

But the best batsman is the one who's putting together a consistent run of decent scores, isn't he? That is, the bloke who's in form.

 

[OverratedSanity]

But the best batsman is the one who's putting together a consistent run of decent scores, isn't he? That is, the bloke who's in form.

Yeah exactly,hendrix's argument doesn't make much sense. The better batsman currently is simply the one who is scoring more runs (ie) in better form.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Not sure what your personal experience or viewing perspective does to change the fact that no one has ever put forward a proper argument to prove that form is anything other than a clump of good scores that, by chance, happen to be grouped together.

The point being, if you're going to select a batsman, surely it shouldn't be based on a concept that's about as well proven as the tooth fairy. Just select the best batsman.

Depends completely how you define form. I think a player's definition of form would be far removed from how you've raised it.

 

[Tangles]

I doubt the county attacks he has faced are anything near Haze, triple Mitch and Nate.

 

[vic_orthdox]

I doubt the county attacks he has faced are anything near Haze, triple Mitch and Nate.

Nope, but he has quite a few runs in conditions where no-one else really notched any.

 

[Burgey]

Otherwise England would just pick Pietersen wouldn't they? He's the best batsman who isn't retired who isn't in their side. The fact he's playing T20 somewhere and not making FC runs shouldn't count on this argument - he's the best player, so just pick him.

As for whether you're in form or not, if you've played long enough you know if you're watching the ball and seeing it well, your feet are moving properly in a timely manner and you're well balanced don't you? Isn't that what being in form is? Making runs/ taking wickets which usually equates (from a batting POV) with those sorts of things. It seems a bit too semantic to get into an argument over this. Surely anyone who's played cricket enough has lent on a defensive shot or a cover drive and felt the "ping" of the ball out of the middle when you're just doing it all right and it races off to the fence? Or even leaving the ball well and seeing it early out of the hand? By contrast, if you've played long enough you've probably also had that feeling where you don't know where your off stump is, and you can't hit anything out of the screws no matter how hard you try. I don't see this as just a random run of low or high scores. I just call it being in or out of form.

 

[vic_orthdox]

As for whether you're in form or not, if you've played long enough you know if you're watching the ball and seeing it well, your feet are moving properly in a timely manner and you're well balanced don't you? Isn't that what being in form is? Making runs/ taking wickets which usually equates (from a batting POV) with those sorts of things. It seems a bit too semantic to get into an argument over this. Surely anyone who's played cricket enough has lent on a defensive shot or a cover drive and felt the "ping" of the ball out of the middle when you're just doing it all right and it races off to the fence? Or even leaving the ball well and seeing it early out of the hand? By contrast, if you've played long enough you've probably also had that feeling where you don't know where your off stump is, and you can't hit anything out of the screws no matter how hard you try. I don't see this as just a random run of low or high scores. I just call it being in or out of form.

My point is that a player knows whether he is in or out of form, before the results actually come. You know when you're feet are moving right, your body is getting into the right position, whether or not you're making runs. Sometimes you're in good enough form to nick a good outswinger.

 

[Spikey]

Interestingly the Gillespie article for the guardian suggests they haven't worked technically with Bairstow since he played his last test for England.

Jonny Bairstow is good enough for the Ashes but be brave and back him | Sport | The Guardian

'So we made a pact: the Yorkshire coaches – myself included – agreed we would not speak to him about his method and instead judge him solely on his returns. This would be our only feedback. No longer would he have support staff stopping him every second ball in the nets, telling him to change his grip, stance, backlift or alignment. Instead, the only advice would be when he sought it and based solely on his gameplan for any given day. Sure, we still discuss conditions and what his approach for an innings will be, but in the 18 months that have followed his technique has not been brought up.'

thats a dumb pact

 

[Gob]

I think Ponting at 942 (Hobbs is 942 as well) is a more realistic target or even Hutton at 945. Smith is a real chance of being No2 on ICC points system...
Purely on ICC ranking he would make the Australian side ATG ICC points side.


3 Bradman 961, 4 Ponting 942 , 5 Smith 936

Hayden 935 as one opener, Gilchrist at 874 as keeper at 7

Leaves only one opener and 6 open.
6 would be between Hussey 921, Walters 922, Harvey 921 but of course many would opt for Miller (681 batting, 862 bowling) at 6 to give a genuine all rounder.
Openers is Warner at 880 and Lawry 871 but you could crib a little and make Hussey the opener.

Can't help but feel that the number of games played at a higher frequency has warped ICC point system significantly, as a player in amazing forum can rack up many more tests in that period.
As good as Smith is, it is hard to perceive him as the 10th best of all time.....

He is not and he would struggle to make in to top 40 atm but thats because he has only played 30 tests

Australia play close to 30 tests over the next 18 months including the rest of the Ashes,6 home and away tests against NZ,3 in SL,4 against SA and 4 in India. By the time they are done Smith would still be 27 and if his average remains in the mid to high 50s, we'd probably have the youngest ATG since Sachin

 

[vic_orthdox]

thats a dumb pact

Be interesting to see if the player has naturally fixed it himself; Bairstow would be aware of his flaws more than anyone else, but not having others fret over it could well have made a large difference in him still playing in a natural manner and emphasise his own strengths; while working out how he can improve his weakness rather than apply remedies suggested by others.