• 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** Pakistan and England in the UAE 2015/16

P

Pothas

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Yeah Taylor to open would be silly, middle order for him if he is to play. As I said I think it has to be Bell to open.
 
theegyptian

theegyptian

International Vice-Captain
Pothas said:
Yeah Taylor to open would be silly, middle order for him if he is to play. As I said I think it has to be Bell to open.
Click to expand...
Looking at your team I'd be worried about having all 3 of Bairstow, Buttler and Stokes. There's a chance they are all going to be dead weight on this tour and carrying 3 of them is a bad idea. I feel like Taylor or Ballance if they get in could potentially bat a long time. Not so much with these three.

Bairstow will in all likelihood struggle but he is in excellent form and generally I don't think selecting and dropping players constantly is a good idea. I'd back him to score more runs than Buttler but Buttler's keeping has really come on this summer and likely is a good deal better than Bairstow's now. Keeping to spin is likely to be a fairly important factor in this series and so Buttler probably gets the nod as wicketkeeper leaving Bairstow competing for a batting spot.

Stokes will likely be in for a struggle with the bat and unlikely to offer much penetration with the ball so he is going to be struggling for a spot. Also if they play 2 of Rashid, Ali and Ansari they are better off playing a genuine bowler(finn, wood, plunkett) or a genuine batsman (Taylor, Ballance, whoever) instead of him.

For example a bottom order of

5. Ali, 6. Stokes, 7.Buttler, 8.Rashid, 9.Wood, 10.Broad, 11.Anderson is overkill on the bowling and too weak in the batting. Better off with Ballance or Taylor (or both) instead of Stokes.

and 6. Stokes, 7.Ali, 8.Buttler, 9.Rashid, 10.Broad, 11.Anderson is a little light on the bowling and whilst the batting looks long it's liable to fail anyway. Better off with Wood/Finn/Plunkett instead of Stokes

I'd only play Stokes if they were going down the one spinner route or maybe if Ansari was opening the batting (which will imo be a bad idea as although he is an opener by trade I don't think he is international class by a long way yet (as a bat) and he is likely to be bowling a lot).


Something like the following I'd possibly go with. Just depends if they think Ballance is up to it.

Cook, Bell, Root, Taylor, Ballance/Bairstow, Ali, Buttler, Ansari/Rashid, Wood/Finn/Plunkett, Anderson, Broad


I still wouldn't be averse to Hales going on the tour and opening.
 
Last edited:
P

Pothas

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Leaving Stokes out is the logical move but he might just do something mad and win a match, he sort of has to play. I think he might bowl ok as well.
 
theegyptian

theegyptian

International Vice-Captain
Pothas said:
Leaving Stokes out is the logical move but he might just do something mad and win a match, he sort of has to play. I think he might bowl ok as well.
Click to expand...
Yes I feel bad about it and it feels wrong. Him being there plus the two likeliest spinners being spin bowling allrounders just makes selection really complicated.

I've gotta feeling this similar thing was discussed earlier in the thread.

Maybe your right and they've just got to select him. In a vacuum I think you probably don't play him but as part of a long term approach you're probably right and they have to select him.
 
P

Pothas

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Yeah, it is just the same old Stokes problem. I think he just plays though, we have plenty of other things to worry about, just keep him as a constant.
 
social

social

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I think that most people would agree that the Ashes was one of the lowest standard series that we have seen for many years

For their part, England need:

1. An opening partner for Cook;

2. At least one middle order batsman;

3. Buttler to step up or a replacement;

4. A front-line spinner; and

5. A 3rd quick

It is shocking that Oz are worse off than that
 
J

JRC67

U19 12th Man
Anyway I don't think Taylor as opener is a good option. He isn't a long term bet as he's too much of a lbw and knick off candidate against the new ball and has very rarely batted above 4 in the order in first class cricket - and as one of the better players of spin he's better off in the middle order. Bell or even Stokes (if he didn't have to bowl) are better horses for courses openers in that spot as both will struggle to start against spin and prefer pace and a newer ball. It's tough to know how good anyone is against quality spin these days given the lack of it but I'd fancy Taylor to do as well as anyone in the England side bar Root and probably Cook (if selected).[/QUOTE]

The problem for me is that all the alternatives as opener are either serious nick off candidates, or lbw wickets waiting to happen. He did show in his first test innings that he had the courage to stand up to some pretty hostile South African bowling. Bell might be a shout, but history says that the higher he bats the worse he bats. Stokes or Moeen might be decent horses for courses candidates in the UAe .... but we'd end up in the same position we are now come the South Africa series. You could argue that Root is the best candidate, but he's got to where he is now batting down the order and he's too important to mess around with. Compton seems out of favour but for me is the least flawed of a group of very flawed possible candidates as an out and out opener. Rather than a prospect which excites me I don't see any clearly better alternatives and I think he probably is the best batsman not in the test team (probably better than a couple currently playing). I'm pretty certain over a period of time he would face more balls at a higher overall average than Hales, Lyth etc, but in the ideal world I agree he'd be in the middle order with a Vaughan or Strauss opening, but I don't see anyone in their class in the wings. The lack of depth and quality in the front 5 (except Cook and Root) is a big worry and almost forces us to play 3 all rounders. One of 6, 7 or 8 has had to make a significant batting contribution over 50 to win 3 of the 4 wins this summer.
 
J

JRC67

U19 12th Man
Cabinet96 said:
Nick Compton meets with Trevor Bayliss | Cricket | ESPN Cricinfo

I'd be happy for Compton if he made a return, but I can't help but feel it'd be something of a backwards step.
Click to expand...
I think the fact that Ansari is being mentioned as a possible opener tells the true story of our problems at the top of the order. I suppose the logic would be it would also give us 3 spinners and allow us to bat down to number 9 if you count Rashid as a good enough bat to be considered an all-rounder. I've never seen Ansari bat or bowl so I can't really comment on his potential or how good he could be. I was under the impression he was a bowler who could bat.
 
F

Franco Vazquez

Banned
JRC67 said:
I think the fact that Ansari is being mentioned as a possible opener tells the true story of our problems at the top of the order. I suppose the logic would be it would also give us 3 spinners and allow us to bat down to number 9 if you count Rashid as a good enough bat to be considered an all-rounder. I've never seen Ansari bat or bowl so I can't really comment on his potential or how good he could be. I was under the impression he was a bowler who could bat.
Click to expand...
He has a very ordinary action who could be beaten to the boundaries by the bullies of Pakistan(Younis,Azhar)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top