*Official* Pakistan in England and Ireland 2016

[Scaly piscine]

Everyone's vulnerable early in the innings, Borthwick a little more so. Difference is Borthwick when he gets in is very difficult to dislodge, goes on with it and very rarely throws it away. Unlike most of England's batsmen who will do the hard work for you.

His stats over the last 4 years speak for themselves.

 

[theegyptian]

Rejoice. We won a toss against Pakistan

 

[Adders]

Cook wins a toss.......thank **** for that. Could be an important one here I think.

 

[Howe_zat]

Cook bats first. Given the cloud cover that suggests the toss didn't really matter much. Pleased not to have to bat last more than get to bat first.

 

[Daemon]

Everyone's vulnerable early in the innings, Borthwick a little more so. Difference is Borthwick when he gets in is very difficult to dislodge, goes on with it and very rarely throws it away. Unlike most of England's batsmen who will do the hard work for you.

His stats over the last 4 years speak for themselves.

But he'll be vulnerable when he comes out when a new session starts

 

[Black_Warrior]

So England bat till 10 this time.

 

[Black_Warrior]

I never realistically thought they were going to play 2 spinners. I just got the impression that Bayliss said that just to confuse the opposition a little about what to expect.

 

[Howe_zat]

the kittens are safe for now

 

[theegyptian]

I never realistically thought they were going to play 2 spinners. I just got the impression that Bayliss said that just to confuse the opposition a little about what to expect.

He played 3 in bad ones in Sharjah when the Pakistan bats couldn't hit the seamers off the square, so him and cook are definitely stupid enough to do it. Old Trafford is a wicket you could play two spinners if you had the quality, England don't.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

I never realistically thought they were going to play 2 spinners. I just got the impression that Bayliss said that just to confuse the opposition a little about what to expect.

Yeah, maybe trying to tempt you lot to play 2+2. The bounce at OT will help our bowlers and Wahab will be a handful here when cranks it up. Obviously the leggie is a problem but batting first we may fare better than last week.

 

[Howe_zat]

Bit made of the fact that England haven't lost at OT since Pakistan won here in 2001.

Question: How many times did England win at Old Trafford between 1982 and 2001?

Answer: 1 win in 15 matches. Christ we were ****e.

 

[91Jmay]

Woakes should bat higher than Stokes, more consistent bat but we've seen whenever Stokes bats down the order he lacks the intelligence to play properly and just slogs.

 

[Howe_zat]

Woakes should bat higher than Stokes, more consistent bat but we've seen whenever Stokes bats down the order he lacks the intelligence to play properly and just slogs.

Nah that's rubbish. Not close to being as good a batsman.

 

[91Jmay]

Nah that's rubbish. Not close to being as good a batsman.

Correct, he is marginally better. Play them both at 6 for 30 tests and Woakes averages higher with more 50+ scores. Stokes probably has more crazy, jaw dropping 100s. But so would Darren Stevens.

 

[Howe_zat]

cricketweb is on Mixlr. Mixlr is a simple way to share live audio ... for comms today

 

[Pothas]

Woakes is perfect at 8, with him there we can just pick the best spinner possible, even if he bats worse than Monty. We just don't have one to pick.

 

[Dan]

Correct, he is marginally better. Play them both at 6 for 30 tests and Woakes averages higher with more 50+ scores. Stokes probably has more crazy, jaw dropping 100s. But so would Darren Stevens.

#BearsBias

 

[Compton]

Batting Woakes above Stokes would be lunacy. It's a cracking example of why just using averages is a daft way to compare cricketers.

If Stokes gets in and set you want him to have as long as possible to punish the opposition. Woakes will make plenty of 30-60 scores, but will never really make many tons at test level. Stokes may get out early sometimes, but he's more than capable of big scores.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Woakes should bat higher than Stokes, more consistent bat but we've seen whenever Stokes bats down the order he lacks the intelligence to play properly and just slogs.

Obviously you know more about English cricket than me, but . . . seriously?

I find that hard to comprehend

edit: looked up the stats and very surprised to find that Stokes first-class average is only 34

 

[91Jmay]

Batting Woakes above Stokes would be lunacy. It's a cracking example of why just using averages is a daft way to compare cricketers.

If Stokes gets in and set you want him to have as long as possible to punish the opposition. Woakes will make plenty of 30-60 scores, but will never really make many tons at test level. Stokes may get out early sometimes, but he's more than capable of big scores.

Understatement of the century.

I'm being a bit of a contrarian and I'm not totally sure I'd bat Stokes below Woakes but the idea there is a great yawning difference between them as batsmen is a huge myth. Stokes scoring quickly is a big positive in his favour, Woakes being technically superior and more solid is a positive in his favour.

They are both in reality number 7s (along with Moeen). So obviously England are batting none of them at number 7.