1st Test, Edgbaston, Birmingham

[harsh.ag]

If Roy plays, he should be at 5. He cannot open or be at 3. That won't work.

 

[MW1304]

If Roy plays, he should be at 5. He cannot open or be at 3. That won't work.

Somebody has to bat in the top 3. Can't bat everyone at 5.

 

[harsh.ag]

Somebody has to bat in the top 3. Can't bat everyone at 5.

Yeah, but Roy will definitely not work. I mean, Woakes works better than Roy. They could try balancing the twin objectives of trying to find a top order and playing to their strengths. Open with Burns and Woakes. Denly at 3. Roy at 5. Bairstow comes in at 8.

 

[MW1304]

I think the idea that Woakes would actually work as a top order bat is a bit of a fantasy tbh. Also not really fair on him to prioritise his secondary role.

If Roy can bash a dreadful-looking 50 like he did against Ireland every now and then, he'll be doing better than anyone else could.

 

[Pothas]

Yeah it is just because of the way that he looks, he would just get out in regulation ways for low scores a lot.

 

[harsh.ag]

I don't actually think Woakes works there either in any real way. The point is to maximize runs scored. Woakes opening + Roy at 5 gives more runs (in my head) than Roy opening + Woakes at 8/9.

Virender Sehwag is the greatest test opener in the Roy mould. And even he averaged 20 odd wherever the ball swings, i.e. England, NZ, and SA. Roy would be lucky to average 15.

 

[Burgey]

I suppose the thinking is that in a low scoring series, if he slog-flukes a couple of 50s, then he will have contributed.

I think the only thing stopping Australia being odd on favourites to demolish England this series is the banning of Smith and Warner. There’s just that bit of uncertainty about how they’ll comeback. If they’d been playing solidly at their usual level for the year leading up to this series, Australia would be unbackable even with the rest of the spud batting line up.

As dodgy as Australia’s batting line up is, England is constantly 3/30-50 odd these days, and if you’re that sort of score consistently against good attacks you simply have to lose more often than not. That’s why, regardless of meme low order runs in the past, it really is vital they find two of the top three to bat solidly if not spectacularly.

 

[stephen]

Yep, you turn those 3/50 scores even into 3/100 and you've got a much more competitive team.

Meanwhile, Australia keep finding players and then dropping them for the Langer favourites.

 

[Adders]

Yeah a lot of talk about how weak both batting lines up are, but the Aussies have the best bat in the world + Warner. If those 2 have good series then they will comfortably score more runs than us.

 

[Burgey]

Will be so interesting to see how Smith goes. Sort of expect Warner to be Warner but the series is probably decided on whether TPC comes back at something approaching his best.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Yep, you turn those 3/50 scores even into 3/100 and you've got a much more competitive team.

Meanwhile, Australia keep finding players and then dropping them for the Langer favourites.

so cringey just stahp

 

[morgieb]

Will be so interesting to see how Smith goes. Sort of expect Warner to be Warner but the series is probably decided on whether TPC comes back at something approaching his best.

My main worry with Smith is that even at his best he always seemed vulnerable on dicey wickets. I guess that could apply to any batsman but there are a couple who could score runs regardless, Smith always seemed to fail on them.

I think the toss will be key. Obviously England still beat Ireland despite being shot out for <100 but Australia's bowling is a lot better than theirs when the ball isn't hooping (and more importantly, our batting >>> theirs) so I don't think Australia will let up if they can roll England. My main worry is that I suspect our bowling will have moments where they just get it somewhat wrong. Which is why picking the right bowling is so important.

 

[stephen]

so cringey just stahp

I'll stop when players are picked on merit instead of the whims of Langer.

What did Marsh do to earn a call up?
What did Patterson/Burns do to get dropped from the squad?
What did Siddle do to earn a call up?
What has Harris done to retain his spot?
What has Labuschagne done to earn a call up?

It's Langer picking favourites. Second div county form has never been worth anything before and there's no compelling reason to start counting it now.

You don't just drop players who have been performing at test level because they don't have success on a raging green top in a glorified centre wicket practice.

 

[TheJediBrah]

My main worry with Smith is that even at his best he always seemed vulnerable on dicey wickets. I guess that could apply to any batsman but there are a couple who could score runs regardless, Smith always seemed to fail on them.

I think Smith generally did better than anyone else even on dicey wickets. It just seemed that he didn't do as well because those kind of wickets can be a lottery and you can get out easily despite doing nothing wrong, and compared to flatter wickets where he just didn't ever get out it looks worse in comparison.

 

[Burgey]

My main worry with Smith is that even at his best he always seemed vulnerable on dicey wickets. I guess that could apply to any batsman but there are a couple who could score runs regardless, Smith always seemed to fail on them.

I think the toss will be key. Obviously England still beat Ireland despite being shot out for <100 but Australia's bowling is a lot better than theirs when the ball isn't hooping (and more importantly, our batting >>> theirs) so I don't think Australia will let up if they can roll England. My main worry is that I suspect our bowling will have moments where they just get it somewhat wrong. Which is why picking the right bowling is so important.

yeah it will be interesting, though tbh immediately pre-ban he had probably developed even further since the 2016 tour. He had that tour of India where he scored runs for fun on virtually every wicket they could prepare - not green seamers, but ones where it was doing a bit. He's not impervious to getting out early if it's moving, but i still think if he gets to twenty odd he'll basically set like concrete and you can start preparing for the next test. I'd still back him to completely bat in that bubble of his once he's in, so it's going to be vital for England to nail him before he gets set. Once he's in, he (used to, anyway) rarely gives a chance.

 

[Starfighter]

My main worry with Smith is that even at his best he always seemed vulnerable on dicey wickets.

You mean like when he scored 48* out of 85?

 

[mr_mister]

Smith did get four 70+ scores in the WC and had a fewr really unlucky dismissals. He performed at about his par for the format so I'm confident he can score plenty in tests

 

[TheJediBrah]

Smith did get four 70+ scores in the WC and had a fewr really unlucky dismissals. He performed at about his par for the format so I'm confident he can score plenty in tests

Yeah he was fine in the WC, would have done a lot better and probably had a similar tournament to KW if Warner & Finch didn't keep putting on 100+

 

[Arachnodouche]

Has Alex Carey been sent back to Aus? The guy showed more class, admittedly in a different format, than a few of the probables in the line-up.

Ah, see Waugh Jr. and Warne are on it already.

 

[Burgey]

I think he has a county contract, so he's over there and close by should he be required for a call up.