Not sure moving someone down the order who averages 45 this year and a high score of 150 plus is likely for a promising player who has yet to make a test ton is very likely.
-
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 in England and Ireland 2016
- Thread starter Grumpy
- Start date
zaremba
Cricketer Of The Year
A touch harsh on Bairstow, TC?
zaremba
Cricketer Of The Year
His average is because of that 155. Remove that and he averages 23 this year and 12 this season.
Take almost every players highest score out of the equation and they have a poor average. Maybe we should redo averages discounting 50s and 100s.
England won't move Woakes above Ali until he has a test century, particularly when 2 of the top 5 have never scored one.
Lol at people actually putting woakes in a combined side when the same people along with everyone else here gave me dogs abuse for suggesting woakes might have deserved to retain his spot in the side after a victory in South Africa last winter.
Some right jokers on this site ffs
Last edited:
grecian
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Chippy little soul aren't you? but nice you don't hold grudges about arguments no-one else probably remember. In the end Howe* has been a big fan of Woakes, so seems odd you direct this at him.
Actually may not be true, get the young uns mixed up on here,
Last edited:
Adders
Cricketer Of The Year
If you don't like it, you could always.....y'know......**** off.
Woakes certainly got some stick here earlier in the piece which based on his performances at the time was probably justified. That said he's had a couple of loyal fans here too right from the get go (Cab and Jmay spring to mind and Howe as grecian mentioned) so I find it very hard to believe that you were "abused" by "everyone" for saying he deserved to retain his place.
And he's been the best bowler in this series so how the hell could anyone not put him in a combined side??
That really was an uncalled for and dire post.
Howe_zat
Audio File
Nah. I've been on the fence.
Top_Cat
Request Your Custom Title Now!
Not a criticism, he's in form to be sure. For mine, as a function of his batting position and role in the team, he's part of that long tail which allows the guns to control the flow of the game rather than one of the guns. A good knock from him won't set the tone like a Root or Cook ton will.
Black_Warrior
Cricketer Of The Year
I am not aware of the specific conversation you are referring to from the SA series but this is a common conversation on this forum. It depends on what you based your argument on.
If you want to suggest a player, who doesn't have the records or body of work to show, and is performing poorly is actually a good player with potential, then you should expect that most people will write off this player, and you need to have a very strong point to make your case.
For example I believe that Asad Shafiq is an extremely good player, has the potential to be one of the best in the world but I don't believe he has quite demonstrated that yet in terms of numbers and his body of work and no one on this forum really rates him. So I am not going to start an argument that Shafiq is better than so and so or something along those lines because I don't believe I have strong grounds yet to make that case.
Woakes looked crap in South Africa last year. If you believe there was something in him that impressed you or made you think the potential, you should have made that point, but in my experience, it's better to wait for the player to put the numbers on board.
Last edited:
Howe_zat
Audio File
Sadly the new rankings have placed Chris Woakes in 11th with a single ranking point keeping him behind Mark Craig, himself behind someone who is literally not allowed to be an allrounder at present, so a bit of poetic licence may make it work.
1. Ashwin 427
2. Shakib 384
3. Philander 275
3. Broad 275
5. Stokes 270
6. Moeen Ali 260
7. Jadeja 254
8. Starc 235
9. Hafeez 222
10. Craig 179
11. Woakes 178
Howe_zat
Audio File
I kind of think there must be something skewed in their formula towards bowling because really everyone in that list plays as a bowler. Stokes and Hafeez are the exceptions - and clearly Hafeez being there is just weird circumstances, and Stokes did replac Steven Finn in our last team.WTF Broad
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
It's easy for gun bowlers who can bat a bit to end up high on that list. I believe Steyn was really high at one point.WTF Broad
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
Everybody bats but not everybody bowls. It's just easier to pick up batting points as a predominately bowling player than it is to pick up bowling points as non-frontline bowler.
Howe_zat
Audio File
I guess I think that an allrounder rating should be based on allroundering points, rather than accumulating batting and bowling points. Scoring 11* from number 10 should award you 0 allroundering points.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
It's just something basic like (batting*bowling)^0.5 I think.
EDIT: Actually it's just batting*bowling/1000.
I was so busy at my jobs that I did not get to watch any of the second test but looking at scorecard tells what a horrific test match Pakistan had.
I knew this was going to happen, good on England to give first game at Lords so that they could win something :P .
I knew this was going to happen, good on England to give first game at Lords so that they could win something :P .
Howe_zat
Audio File
such a great waste of potential geekiness.