wpdavid
Hall of Fame Member
You may want to check out our top 6 in the 1977/78 tours of Pakistan and NZ. Post Packer defections but pre-Gower.Is this England's weakest ever batting lineup?
You may want to check out our top 6 in the 1977/78 tours of Pakistan and NZ. Post Packer defections but pre-Gower.Is this England's weakest ever batting lineup?
Yeah it has generally worked at home when you 300 is often good score and you have Anderson. Plus people like Moeen and Woakes are genuinely good batsmen in England.It kinda does, in some circumstances. Has been the basis of what success we've had in the last few years.
Not much we can do about having no top order options.
I feel like they'd go an extra bowler instead of one of your indomitable top 3wouldnt broad v woakes be academic anyway when in the ashes you can field
deck
chairs
titanic
root
buttler
stokes
bairstow
moeen
woakes
broad
anderson
with archer first reserve?
No there isn't. But I feel it's even more of a problem post-Cook, even though AC wasn't a run machine towards the end of his test career. Some combination from Roy, Burns, Sibley, Denly and Jennings vs Starc and Cummins looks like a recipe for 10 for 3 as often as not. I remember when pinch hitters became a thing in ODIs all those years ago, and we almost need to find a couple of pinch blockers to try and see off the new ball before our middle order get cracking. Maybe, anyway.It kinda does, in some circumstances. Has been the basis of what success we've had in the last few years.
Not much we can do about having no top order options.
You make very good point. A top 6 of Boycott, Brearley, Rose, Randall, Roope, Miller is very weak, although the top 6 that played against New Zealand of Boycott, Randall, Radley, Roope, Gatting, Botham is a lot strongerYou may want to check out our top 6 in the 1977/78 tours of Pakistan and NZ. Post Packer defections but pre-Gower.
Yeah one of the biggest factors in our different home/away results is that all our #7s #8s are good for multiple significant scores across an English summer, while they're pretty much #9s in a lot of away conditions. That said if Starc and Cummins are are able to bowl at their top pace Australia are probably one of the few sides that could genuinely make our lower order redundant on a lot of occasions.Yeah it has generally worked at home when you 300 is often good score and you have Anderson. Plus people like Moeen and Woakes are genuinely good batsmen in England.
Problem is that Bairstow doesn't want to bat at 3 (and definitely wouldn't open). He likes the safety of batting 5 to 7 and keeping too much to potentially give up the gloves and move to 3 where he has constant pressure to score runs. Can't blame him too much but it's frustrating that he seemed decent at no.3 but doesn't want to do it.Bairstow's 100 in SL was very good. As was his 50 at 3 Vs WI. Worth a punt at 3.
If we were to deploy a blockwatchman of some description then I'd pick Woakes for it. Has better classical batting than half our top order.No there isn't. But I feel it's even more of a problem post-Cook, even though AC wasn't a run machine towards the end of his test career. Some combination from Roy, Burns, Sibley, Denly and Jennings vs Starc and Cummins looks like a recipe for 10 for 3 as often as not. I remember when pinch hitters became a thing in ODIs all those years ago, and we almost need to find a couple of pinch blockers to try and see off the new ball before our middle order get cracking. Maybe, anyway.
I think the technique Bairstow has developed to help make him successful at ODIs has made him considerably more vulnerable to swing bowling, so I wouldn't want to see him batting there in a home series. Still worth a try on future tours of the subcontinent though, imoProblem is that Bairstow doesn't want to bat at 3 (and definitely wouldn't open). He likes the safety of batting 5 to 7 and keeping too much to potentially give up the gloves and move to 3 where he has constant pressure to score runs. Can't blame him too much but it's frustrating that he seemed decent at no.3 but doesn't want to do it.
The other argument is that he only ever had one good year in tests (2016 where he averaged 59 against a next best of 34 in 2017). Must say his technique looks worse than it used to in tests.Interesting comments about Bairstow's technique getting worse because of one day cricket. He averaged 41.62 with Cook as captain, but only 31.15 with Root as captain. That is a massive decline in his batting.
He had a nice purple patch where Gillespie sorted his technique out, but since then it's just regressed again, like everybody has under Bayliss.The other argument is that he only ever had one good year in tests (2016 where he averaged 59 against a next best of 34 in 2017). Must say his technique looks worse than it used to in tests.
I did not look at that, very interesting. Either way it clearly shows he has the talent to be a good test match batsman but whatever the reason, his inability to maintain a good technique has made him a much worse batsman.The other argument is that he only ever had one good year in tests (2016 where he averaged 59 against a next best of 34 in 2017). Must say his technique looks worse than it used to in tests.