4th Test at Old Trafford, Manchester

[zaremba]

Maybe it matters less than people think, but there's logic to it - you want to see off the new ball up front and score quickly when the tail comes in. Stokes has mediocre defensive technique but is spectacularly good at batting with the tail. In a better team he'd be a 6, but he shouldn't ever bat higher than 5.

I'm no analyst - least of all of batting - but his defensive technique seems pretty sound to me? Perhaps I've just been watching too many brief innings from all our other batsmen...

 

[Uppercut]

Completely agree. Particularly once a match is underway. It's very rare that teams ever think to change the batting order even though the match circumstances have changed, the new ball has been seen off, the outwsing bowler is knackered and an offspinner is on, the scoring rate needs a boost, etc.

I would expect more teams to try to keep a left-hand/right-hand combination at the crease, given how much of a ballache it is to bowl and field to. When Warner and Labuschagne were batting together on day one last week England couldn't get their line right at all, especially since they kept stealing quick singles.

 

[Cubiscus]

Here's mine:

Burns
Denly
Root
Pope - tempted to try Roy here
Stokes
Bairstow
Foakes (w) - lets just get the best keeper in, not fit around Bairstow (who hasn't been great with the gloves)
Archer - hopefully would bat more sensibly at 8
Leach - moved up to 9 given Broad's state
Broad
Anderson - for Woakes

 

[Uppercut]

I'm no analyst - least of all of batting - but his defensive technique seems pretty sound to me? Perhaps I've just been watching too many brief innings from all our other batsmen...

Yeah I should probably have gone with "decent" rather than mediocre. I certainly know less about batting than you and I don't see a lot wrong with it either.

But he is only averaging mid-30s and it's not because he doesn't have the shots. Might be more of a shot selection problem than a technical one, but the point about wanting him down the order still stands.

 

[DonnyBoy]

I'm no analyst - least of all of batting - but his defensive technique seems pretty sound to me? Perhaps I've just been watching too many brief innings from all our other batsmen...

Thanks for the welcome and yes regarding the mediocre defensive technique comment above .. I think Stokes proved that to be totally wrong in the first part of his innings the other day, he was like a wall/ Dravid MkII.
I think the main point im getting at though is that when players are left out on the premise they aren't a this or aren't a that etc, too much pigeon holing. Jut get the best players in and play around with the order! I know that's never gonna happen . such outdated thinkers at the helm it seems forever..

 

[morgieb]

It wasn't like it was a close tug of war which fluctuated either direction for days. They made some really really costly blunders costing them a match they dominated for almost 90% of the 4 days. That kind of thing can be very demoralizing.

Not saying they'll collapse completely from hereon out though, infact Smith coming back will provide them with a huge boost. But I wouldn't be shocked it they did fall apart.

Yeah this is what worried me. If we hadn't bowled them out for 67 and they won chasing 250 it could make them even more motivated. Throwing a near certain Test win away when a win would secure the Ashes could easily affect them mentally.

OTOH I do remember England losing key Tests in recent Ashes but bouncing back (Leeds 09, Lords 15, Perth 10). They were all mostly blowouts though.

 

[wpdavid]

He (Pope) seems to be batting 5 so, split the difference.

I haven't seen his technique tbf. I'm just assuming it's more suited to the top order than Bairstow's because, well, almost everyone's is.

I think Pope batted at 5 in his one CC innings of the season because Sam Curran had to be promoted to number 3 as he was joining the England squad at the end of the day. It looks like Surrey intend him to bat at 4, but circumstances haven't allowed yet. if he does come back into the test team, I'd prefer to see him at 6 now that Stokes has nailed the number 5 position. Pope batting at 4 after Cummins and Hazlewood have taken two wickets for next to nothing isn't something I want to see.

 

[wpdavid]

OTOH I do remember England losing key Tests in recent Ashes but bouncing back (Leeds 09, Lords 15, Perth 10). They were all mostly blowouts though.

And you could look at that from an Australian pov too; bouncing back at Leeds after losing at Lord's in 2009 (OK there was a draw in between), dominating at Old Trafford after being annihilated at Lord's in 2013 and winning easily at Lord's after being well beaten at Cardiff in 2015. I really don't think there's such a thing as momentum over here nowadays.

 

[GIMH]

It can't be easy knowing you've let such a big chance slip through your fingers (literally in case of Lyon). Smith will probably be as good as ever, but the media will keep reminding them that it is 17 years since they won in England and they missed a huge chance to bury that hoodoo.

Also it would suck knowing that you've dominated most of the series and still find yourself level on the scoreline.

Have they really dominated most of the series?

England were ahead in the first Test until midway through day four. The second swung back and forth but only England actually came close to winning.

Even the third at the close of day one everyone said 'England's day' except for Burgey who proved that even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

Its been a classic Test series to date for me in terms of ebb and flow.

 

[Groundking]

Yeah I should probably have gone with "decent" rather than mediocre. I certainly know less about batting than you and I don't see a lot wrong with it either.

But he is only averaging mid-30s and it's not because he doesn't have the shots. Might be more of a shot selection problem than a technical one, but the point about wanting him down the order still stands.

This is more because of his crap first 20 tests where he only averaged 27.72 with bat (and 40.67 with ball) but he's averaged 40.67 with bat (and 27.85 with ball) in the next 35 tests up to and including the most recent one

Anyway this would be my team for the next test.

Burns
Sibley
Root
Denly
Stokes
Pope
Bairstow
Archer
Broad
Leach
Anderson

Roy is ****ing rubbish and never going to make it so it's time to cut our losses now, Anderson for Woakes is a no brainer imo if he's fit, but it does give Archer and Broad nose bleeds. Finally I think Pope is too talented a player to not get into the team and the perfect spot for putting in young middle order players is open for him, with Buttler looking shot, as it provides enough protection on paper from the new ball and the bowlers should have a few overs in their legs by this point so it's easier to get to grips with test cricket instead of having him bat 4 like he did against India and being exposed early with our top order woes.

 

[BSM]

This is a small thing, but I definitely don't think Leach should be moved up in the order like some of these posts are saying. He may not be the worst bat in the team (probably 9th best in the lineup when Broad and Anderson are in) but there is a genuine strategy to having your no.11 be a little bit more competent at batting than your no.10. Like if Broad was there at the end I doubt he would have survived that long, nor do I think Leach would have definitely got the job done at 10 either. If the man's excelled in that position (let's face it, he's excelled as much as any no.11 can) then there is no need to move him unless he is batting as a nightswatchman

 

[hazsa19]

This is more because of his crap first 20 tests where he only averaged 27.72 with bat (and 40.67 with ball) but he's averaged 40.67 with bat (and 27.85 with ball) in the next 35 tests up to and including the most recent one

Anyway this would be my team for the next test.

Burns
Sibley
Root
Denly
Stokes
Pope
Bairstow
Archer
Broad
Leach
Anderson

Roy is ****ing rubbish and never going to make it so it's time to cut our losses now, Anderson for Woakes is a no brainer imo if he's fit, but it does give Archer and Broad nose bleeds. Finally I think Pope is too talented a player to not get into the team and the perfect spot for putting in young middle order players is open for him, with Buttler looking shot, as it provides enough protection on paper from the new ball and the bowlers should have a few overs in their legs by this point so it's easier to get to grips with test cricket instead of having him bat 4 like he did against India and being exposed early with our top order woes.

Yeh this is my team. Let's just let Roy be an incredible one day opener, it's not like we've been blessed with many of those recently. I do think Buttler should make a successful lower order Test batsman, but he looks completely shot right now. He's a confidence player and from memory he rarely found it on the big stage after similar struggles. Don't know why people would move Denly immediately after he's played a decent innings, let him have another crack without the added pressure of opening. Stokes bats no higher than 5 for me. He's not on the same planet as Kallis so there's no comparison there. He's just played 2 wonderful innings' at 5 too. Root played nicely as well, so hopefully that gives him confidence to stick it out at 3.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

Anderson bowled 20 overs today and took 1-38.

 

[Burgey]

Hero

 

[Daemon]

Anderson bowled 20 overs today and took 1-38.

Makes sense https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.te...t-office-warns-heatwave-continues-fourth/amp/

 

[TheJediBrah]

there is a genuine strategy to having your no.11 be a little bit more competent at batting than your no.10

really though?

 

[Anil]

does anyone think it will dim the lustre of stoke's headingley performance if england go on to draw or lose this series? like for example, would botham's exploits there in '81 be as revered if england hadn't come back and closed out the ashes in the next test?

 

[the big bambino]

Lets hope we find out.

 

[TheJediBrah]

does anyone think it will dim the lustre of stoke's headingley performance if england go on to draw or lose this series?

no, I don't think it will

 

[vcs]

Have they really dominated most of the series?

England were ahead in the first Test until midway through day four. The second swung back and forth but only England actually came close to winning.

Even the third at the close of day one everyone said 'England's day' except for Burgey who proved that even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

Its been a classic Test series to date for me in terms of ebb and flow.

For the away team, they've done well IMO

First Test ended up being comprehensive in their favour. Second Test, they had chances to put England on the mat at the end of day 4 if they'd taken their catches/reviews on Stokes.